General Assembly Economic and Social Council

Transcription

1 United Nations Economic and Social Council Distr.: 19 January 2018 Original: English Seventy-third session Operational activities for development: operational activities for development of the United Nations system Economic and Social Council 2018 session* Agenda item 7 (a) Operational activities of the United Nations for international development cooperation: follow-up to policy recommendations of the and the Council Implementation of 71/243 on the quadrennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system, 2018 Report of the Secretary-** Summary The present report is submitted in response to 71/243 and comprises the first annual overview of the progress achieved and challenges encountered in the implementation of that. The report was prepared in consultation with the United Nations development system, based on the strategic plans, annual reports and other documents made available by the system. It also benefited substantially from four surveys administered by the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the Secretariat and the information management system administered by UNDG. Financial data was primarily sourced from the database and reporting system managed by CEB. * E/2018/1. ** The present report was submitted late owing to the extensive United Nations system-wide consultation process required and the late feedback received from the four surveys conducted by the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the Secretariat. (E) * *

2 Abbreviations CEB DOCO ECE ESCAP ESCWA FAO ICAO ICT IFAD IFI ILO IMF IMO ITC ITU NGOs ODA OECD/DAC OHCHR OIOS PAHO UNAIDS UNCTAD UNDAF UNDG UNDP UNEP UNESCO UNFPA United Nations system Chief Executives Board for Coordination Development Operations Coordination Office Economic Commission for Europe Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations International Civil Aviation Organization Information and communications technology International Fund for Agricultural Development International financial institution International Labour Organization International Monetary Fund International Maritime Organization International Trade Centre International Telecommunication Union Non-governmental organizations Official development assistance Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development/ Development Assistance Committee Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Office of Internal Oversight Services Pan-American Health Organization Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS United Nations Conference on Trade and Development United Nations Development Assistance Framework United Nations Development Group United Nations Development Programme United Nations Environment Programme United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization United Nations Population Fund 2/157

3 UN-Habitat UNHCR UNICEF UNIDO UNISDR UNITAR UNODC UNOPS UNRWA UNU UNV UN-Women UNWTO UPU WFP WHO WIPO WMO United Nations Human Settlements Programme Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees United Nations Children s Fund United Nations Industrial Development Organization United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction United Nations Institute for Training and Research United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime United Nations Office for Project Services United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East United Nations University United Nations Volunteers programme United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women World Tourism Organization Universal Postal Union World Food Programme World Health Organization World Intellectual Property Organization World Meteorological Organization 3/157

4 Contents Abbreviations I. Introduction II. Aligning the United Nations development system to the 2030 Agenda III. Funding of United Nations operational activities for development A. Context and overview of United Nations operational activities for development B. Funding to United Nations entities C. Allocation of funds D. Select funding issues IV. Enabling programme countries to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals A. Eradicating poverty and leaving no one behind B. Supporting capacity development C. Providing integrated policy advice D. Assisting countries through normative support E. Reinforcing assistance to least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing States F. Supporting middle-income countries to address continuing and emerging challenges G. Partnerships H. Enhancing complementarity among humanitarian, development and sustaining-peace efforts I. Securing gender equality and women s empowerment V. Improving the functioning of the United Nations development system A. Presence and division of labour B. The resident coordinator function C. Integrated support to maximize results D. Harmonization and simplification of business practices E. Regional dimension VI. Enhancing the effectiveness of the United Nations development system A. Managing for results B. Follow-up and monitoring VII. Conclusion Annex Quadrennial comprehensive policy review monitoring and reporting framework Page 4/157

5 Tables 1. Alignment of strategic planning cycles with the quadrennial comprehensive policy review cycle Requests for United Nations support on Sustainable Development Goals Number and percentage of joint programmes targeting Sustainable Development Goals Breakdown of funding flows for 16 entities, Effective cost-recovery rates, Expenditures by country group Expenditures and physical presence across country groups, Countries preferred providers of external support, by type of support, Strengthening national capacities Provision of policy advice Countries preferred providers of external support, by support category Countries preferred providers of external support, by performance factors Provision of South-South cooperation Incorporation of South-South cooperation in the strategic plans of United Nations entities Incorporation of South-South cooperation in the annual reports of United Nations entities Challenges for United Nations country teams in providing support for South-South cooperation, Types of support requested within South-South cooperation, Government activities on South-South cooperation and requests for United Nations support on South-South cooperation Collective approaches to United Nations support for South-South cooperation Focus areas of United Nations activities Degree of collaboration among United Nations agencies Extent of collaboration between development and humanitarian action, and between development and peacebuilding Tailoring of United Nations country presence to the needs of Governments and mix of capacities and skills of United Nations staff Perceptions of the United Nations development system s flexibility, cost-effectiveness and ability to collaborate Rationalization of United Nations presence on the ground Expenditures at the Fiji and Barbados multi-country offices, Division of labour (versus overlaps) among United Nations entities Resident coordinators capacity and prerogative Extent of participation of United Nations agencies in the management and accountability system at the country level, /157

6 Figures 30. Implementation of the management and accountability system at the country level, 2015 and Delegation of authority of the resident coordinator, United Nations country team reporting to resident coordinators United Nations system support for Delivering as one Main challenges when establishing a business operating strategy Management of business operations functions Factors preventing agencies from utilizing long-term agreements, Non-monetary benefits of the business operating strategy Effectiveness of the contributions of the regional commissions on highest priority regional/ subregional issues Effectiveness of the contributions of the regional commissions on highest priority regional/ subregional issues, by region Contribution of the regional commissions to regional/subregional issues Contribution of the Regional Coordination Mechanisms and the Regional United Nations Development Groups to regional/subregional issues United Nations entity responses on knowledge management I. Integrated country-level response by the United Nations to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals II. Financing of United Nations system-wide activities, III. Growth in official development assistance and funding for United Nations op erational activities for development, IV. Channels of multilateral aid, V. Real change over time in funding for United Nations operational activities for development, VI. Contributions received by United Nations entities, VII. Main groups of funding sources, VIII. Main contributors, IX. Local resources contributions, by region, X. Non-core funding modalities for United Nations operational activities for development, XI. Deposits made to United Nations-administered multi-donor trust funds, by fund category, XII. Top contributors to inter-agency pooled funds, XIII. Contributions to inter-agency pooled funds, by theme, XIV. Funding from global vertical funds, XV. Distribution of expenditures on United Nations operational activities for development, /157

7 XVI. Expenditures in countries, by size of expenditures XVII. Countries with over 10 per cent of expenditures channelled through inter-agency pooled funds, XVIII. Expenditures in least developed countries, XIX. Ensuring focus towards the most vulnerable XX. United Nations support in identifying and reaching those furthest behind XXI. United Nations support to reaching those furthest behind, by inco me group XXII. Areas where the United Nations contribution has been especially significant (last two years) and where assistance will be needed (next four years) XXIII. Effectiveness in building national capacities XXIV. United Nations support towards building partnerships XXV. Utilization of national systems and institutions by the United Nations development system.. 51 XXVI. Degree of access to various categories of official data XXVII. Collaboration in capacity-building around data XXVIII. Coordination and/or integration of policy advice XXIX. Promoting linkages between the normative and operational activities of the United Nations. 57 XXX. Alignment with national needs, priorities and plans XXXI. Identifying those that are furthest behind XXXII. Collaboration with external partners, XXXIII. Engagement in partnerships by the United Nations country team XXXIV. Engagement between United Nations development and United Nations humanitarian actors. 74 XXXV. XXXVI. Comparative analysis of overall ratings in gender mainstreaming for the United Nations system, Opinions of Governments and resident coordinators on the division of labour among United Nations entities XXXVII. Measures towards reducing the workload of national partners XXXVIII. Core elements of the standard operating procedures XXXIX. Implementation of standard operating procedures XL. Delivering as one status XLI. Interest in becoming a Delivering as one country, by income group XLII. Varying delegation of authority among heads of agencies XLIII. Support from the regional commissions to the work of the United Nations country team XLIV. Reporting to Governments on the results of United Nations country teams XLV. Content, timeliness and coverage of reports of United Nations country teams XLVI. Promoting compatibility of results-based management systems XLVII. Supporting national results-based management systems /157

8 Boxes 1. The United Nations development system Innovative strategies to reach those furthest behind Challenges to the establishment of common premises Obstacles noted by Governments on the lack of a clear division of labour among United Nations entities Draft headquarters plan of action Regional Coordination Mechanisms Results-based management in the United Nations development system /157

9 I. Introduction 1. The landmark agreements reached in 2015 the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda of the Third International Conference on Financing for Development with their call for a revitalized global and multi-stakeholder partnership for people, the planet and prosperity, are unprecedented in scope and significance. They imply a fundamental shift in the development cooperation paradigm. This paradigm shift, coupled with the profound changes in the development cooperation landscape, demand a bold rethinking of the United Nations development system to ensure that it is fit to support Memb er States efforts in pursuit of sustainable development. 2. To that end, Member States debated the implications of the interlinkages between the alignment of functions, funding practices, governance structures, organizational arrangements, partnership approaches, capacity and impact of the United Nations development system during the 18-month dialogue in the Economic and Social Council on the repositioning of the system. In late 2016, the provided guidance through its 71/243 on the quadrennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities for development. The quadrennial review is aimed at enhancing the system s coherence, effectiveness and efficiency to address the full range of development challenges of our time, as set out in the 2030 Agenda. To move towards the system-wide response needed to deliver the shared results that the 2030 Agenda demands, Member States broadened the scope of the quadrennial review by calling upon all entities of the United Nations development system engaged in operational activities for development to fully implement the consistent with their mandate, role and expertise, and requested the Secretary- to put forward his proposal on a set of key areas by December In response, in July 2017 the Secretary- presented his vision for a system that will act as a catalyst for action, an innovator, a convener and a champion of what works. The vision presents a system that is more strategic, accountable, transparent, collaborative, efficient and effective in delivering results at the country level (A/72/124-E/2018/3). Additional details of the Secretary- s vision are set out in his December 2017 report (A/72/684-E/2018/7), where he presents his proposals on immediate shifts in the way the system operates, as well as adjustments to the longterm course of action, for Member States consideration in The present document is intended as a report on the steps taken so far regarding the mandates emanating from the quadrennial comprehensive policy review for which Member States have already charted the way forward. On the basis of facts and accounts from the ground, it assesses how the system is shifting vis-à-vis the new mandates, so as to better support the implementation of the 2030 Agenda at the national, regional and global levels. 5. The evidence suggests a mixed picture in terms of progress. Alignment of the system s planning and activities with the quadrennial review is still in its initial stages, partly because of the sequencing of internal planning and management alternatives, which need to follow from forthcoming decisions by Member States. A common chapter in the strategic plans of four United Nations entities for that commits to working better together with stronger coherence and collaboration is a first step. However, the specifics of decisions on a whole-of-system response, including the leadership and authority of the resident coordinator, differentiated models of presence, a common back office and the new skill sets required to support 9/157

10 the delivery of the new 2030 Agenda are essential determinants that remain to be addressed. 6. Another key challenge evidenced by the data in the present report is the continuing fragmented nature of the system s funding and how it is inconsistent with the principles of integration and coordination. In addition, data from the gr ound suggest that the United Nations development system continues to struggle to deliver a coherent response around collective results. This is explained by organizational cultures and arrangements that are not conducive to a whole-of-system response, including slow progress in harmonization and simplification of business practices, as well as a disconnect between the practical implementation of joint operations in the field and gaps in efforts at the headquarters level. The Secretary- s proposals in his December 2017 report aim to systematically address these challenges and gaps. 7. The full shift needed to move to a mindset, skills sets, architecture and organizational arrangements based on the Sustainable Development Goals rather than on the Millennium Development Goals is still in progress, partly as it awaits decisions by Member States on critical elements. Yet, a broad range of actions is under way towards a more cohesive approach to key functions, such as support to capacity development and policy advice, backed by a significant effort to generate the guidelines and instruments necessary to better equip United Nations country teams to deliver on the ground. 8. The present report serves as the evidence base of the current situation in relation to mandates for immediate implementation. II. Aligning the United Nations development system to the 2030 Agenda 9. In the 2016 quadrennial comprehensive policy review ( 71/243), the requires the system to step up to the ambition of the 2030 Agenda. Alignment with the 2030 Agenda begins with a repositioning of the work of the United Nations so that the Organization is able to deliver shared results through a system - wide approach. To that end, 71/243 broadens the scope of the quadrennial review to include all entities of the United Nations development system carrying out operational activities for development, and reaffirms that those entities should align their planning and activities, including through their governing bodies where applicable, for the full implementation of the. 10. This means that, in addition to the funds, programmes and other United Nations entities that are already included in the mandate of the quadrennial comprehensive policy review, 13 United Nations specialized agencies (listed in box 1) could potentially become part of the full implementation of the quadrennial review of a United Nations development system consisting of 44 entities that receive funding for operational activities for development. 1 1 There are no commonly agreed definitions of the terms United Nations development system and operational activities for development. For the purposes of the funding analysis, the definitions include those entities and activities linked to contributions in line with the definit ion of ODA provided by OECD. This is not intended to imply that entities listed as part of the United Nations development system for the funding analysis are part of it for other purposes. For example, the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs of the Secretariat is not part of the United Nations development system for purposes other than those of the funding analysis. 10/157

11 Box 1 The United Nations development system Funds and programmes (9) Secretariat departments (13) Specialized agencies (13) Research and training institutions (6) Other entities (3) UNDP (including the Capital Development Fund and UNV), UNEP, UNFPA, UN-Habitat, UNHCR, UNICEF, UNRWA, UN-Women and WFP Department of Economic and Social Affairs, ECA, ECE, ECLAC, ESCAP, ESCWA, Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, OHCHR, UNCTAD, Department of Political Affairs, UNISDR, UNODC and Peacebuilding Support Office FAO, ICAO, IFAD, ILO, IMO, ITU, UNESCO, UNIDO, UNWTO, UPU, WHO, WIPO and WMO United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute, United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research, UNITAR, United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, United Nations System Staff College and UNU ITC, UNAIDS and UNOPS 11. Alignment of the strategic planning and budgetary cycles is a first step towards coordinated and coherent action. Excluding Secretariat departments and the regional commissions, which have a different planning and budgetary cycle, 13 entities are now fully aligned with the quadrennial comprehensive review process, 5 are in progress towards alignment and 8 are not aligned (see table 1). Table 1 Alignment of strategic planning cycles with the quadrennial comprehensive policy review cycle Entity Time frame Strategic planning cycle Alignment with quadrennial comprehensive policy review cycle Number of years Funds and programmes UNDP (including UNV and Capital Development Fund) Yes Yes UNEP Yes Yes UNFPA Yes Yes UN-Habitat No No UNHCR Yes a Yes UNICEF Yes Yes UNWRA In progress In progress b UN-Women Yes Yes WFP Yes In progress c 11/157

12 Entity Time frame Strategic planning cycle Alignment with quadrennial comprehensive policy review cycle Number of years Specialized agencies FAO Yes Yes ICAO No No IFAD Yes Yes d ILO Yes Yes IMO No No ITU No No UNESCO Yes Yes UNIDO e 4 In progress In progress UNWTO No UPU No No WHO No No WIPO In progress In progress f WMO No No Research and training institutions UNICRI No UNIDIR No No UNITAR Yes Yes UNRISD No No UNSSC No UNU No No Other entities ITC In progress Yes UNAIDS In progress In progress g UNOPS Yes Yes Note: For a full list of the entities covered by the 2016 quadrennial comprehensive policy review, see box 1. a Considered to be fully aligned with the quadrennial comprehensive policy review given that the two-year cycle is consistent with the quadrennial review. b UNRWA operates within a six-year strategic planning cycle and approved biennial programme plans. It plans to align its next cycle with the quadrennial review in c WFP submitted its strategic plan one year early, as an exception, with a five-year duration that would enable a return to the four-year strategic plan duration foreseen by its Rule VI.1 in d IFAD has three-year medium-term plans aligned to the three-year replenishment cycles, as it is an international financial institution with funding determined though replenishment exercises. e The UNIDO strategic plan (initially the medium-term programme framework ) was extended to to align it to the quadrennial comprehensive policy review cycle. The budgetary cycle is still biannual (current 2018/9). f The WIPO medium-term strategic plan is for six years ( ) and its budget covers a period of two years ( and ). g UNAIDS joint budgets are prepared and presented on a biennial basis. The Unified Budget, Results and Accountability Framework extends for a six-year period and is synchronized with the planning cycles of the co-sponsors. 12/157

13 12. The degree to which entities are aligning their planning and activities with the quadrennial review varies. 13. In response to requests from their governing boards to work in a more integrated and coherent manner, UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF and UN-Women have developed a common chapter for their strategic plans, which identifies and elaborates on specific areas of collaborative advantage. The entities propose to use the mainstreaming, acceleration and policy support strategy 2 as a key entry point to build the case for prioritization of and investment in activities to ensure that no one is left behind. This new approach should be viewed as a first step towards creating a more collective approach to the strategic planning of the United Nations development system. Figure I Integrated country-level response by the United Nations to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals Source: 2017 UNDAF guidelines. 14. UNDG has updated its guidelines and instruments to better support United Nations country teams in helping Governments to accelerate progress towards the 2030 Agenda, and to ensure that the system s plans, strategies and tools strengthen national ownership and respond coherently to national development needs (see figure I). This includes updating the Mainstreaming the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: Reference Guide for United Nations Country Teams and the creation of 2 See United Nations Development Group concept note, available from - content/uploads/2016/10/maps-concept-note-oct-2015-endorsed-by-undg-on pdf. 13/157

14 a searchable online compendium 3 to support diagnostics, methodologies and riskinformed planning; guidelines to trigger system-wide support for national statistical institutions and reporting on the Sustainable Development Goals; revised UNDAF guidelines with companion pieces to inform a strategic response to the 2030 Agenda; 4 and policy and operational support for country teams on human rights An important achievement is that 85 per cent of programme country Governments reported that the United Nations system s activities are very closely or closely aligned with their development needs and priorities, while 15 per cent reported somewhat aligned activities. Respondents explained that this was achieved by aligning the UNDAF with national development plans; by focusing on achieving the Sustainable Development Goals; by using coordination mechanisms such as chairing of results groups by Governments; and through effective monitoring and evaluation. Constraints included a lack of a national plan or strategy, insufficient availability or use of data in programming, United Nations staff being located outside the country, fragmentation of United Nations activities, and misalignment of projects funded through non-core resources. 16. The United Nations development system is adjusting to the 2030 Agenda at the country level, although this clearly needs to be fast tracked. This is evidenced by 36 per cent of Governments which stated that the United Nations has contributed to a great extent to the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals in the past two years, and 45 per cent which reported to a moderate extent. 17. Table 2 below shows the types of requests for support with the Sustainable Development Goals, with the least requested type being on specific Goals. Lowerincome countries are generally more likely to request support across all four types. Notably, 3 out of the 10 countries with the largest programme expenditures did not request any kind of support, which is likely explained by these countries ongoing humanitarian situations. 18. The largest number of requests are around general orientations and mainstreaming the Sustainable Development Goals, showing that programme countries are beginning to adjust to the new Agenda. 3 Sustainable Development Goals acceleration toolkit, available from - agenda/sdg-acceleration-toolkit/. 4 UNDAF companion guidance, available from 5 Available from UNCTs-on-HR-in-SDG-Implementation-FINAL pdf. 14/157

15 Table 2 Requests for United Nations support on Sustainable Development Goals Has your Government requested support on its national response to the Sustainable Development Goals? Sustainable Development Goal measurement and reporting Requests on specific Sustainable Development Goals orientation on Sustainable Development Goals Mainstreaming Sustainable Development Goals in national development plans Total Income groups Low-income countries (31) Lower-middle-income countries (49) Upper-middle-income countries (43) High-income countries (8) Total (131) Regional groups Eastern and Southern Africa (21) Western and Central Africa (24) Arab States (18) Asia and the Pacific (24) Europe and Commonwealth of Independent States (18) Latin America and the Caribbean (26) Total (131) Source: UNDG information management system. III. Funding of United Nations operational activities for development 19. The quality and quantity of funding deeply affects the ability of the United Nations development system to respond in a cohesive manner to deliver collective results. This section provides a detailed overview of the current funding of United Nations operational activities for development and provides evidence to inform changes that could better enable the system to support the delivery of the 2030 Agenda. A. Context and overview of United Nations operational activities for development 20. United Nations operational activities for development are activities that United Nations entities carry out towards the promotion of development and the welfare of developing countries. Operational activities for development cover both longer-term development-related activities as well as those with a shorter-term humanitarian 15/157

16 assistance focus. The related online technical note 6 contains further information concerning funding definitions and classifications. 21. Expenditure on United Nations operational activities for development totalled $30.4 billion 7 in This represented about two thirds of the $45.8 billion in expenditure on all United Nations system-wide activities. Peacekeeping operations accounted for one fifth of total expenditures, while global norm- and standard-setting, policy, advocacy and other functions of the United Nations system made up the remaining 14 per cent (see figure II). Figure II Financing of United Nations system-wide activities, Funding for United Nations operational activities for development accounted for 19.7 per cent of total ODA in Since 2002, funding for operational activities for development has grown steadily, following a similar trend as ODA, as shown in figure III. At the same time, funding for United Nations humanitarian activities has increased rapidly compared with that for development activities and overall ODA. This is particularly the case in recent years, with funding for humanitarian assistance increasing by 80 per cent between 2012 and 2016, in real terms, owing primarily to the crises in Iraq, the Syrian Arab Republic and Yemen. 6 Forthcoming. Will be available from 7 This amount differs slightly from the $29.5 billion in contributions received by the United Nations development system in 2016 since contributions are not necessarily expended in the same calendar year as they are received. 8 Local resources ($1.9 billion) channelled through the United Nations development system are excluded, as they do not fall within the definition of ODA. 16/157

17 Figure III Growth in official development assistance and funding for United Nations operational activities for development, Growth in real terms (2002 = 100%) 300% 250% 200% 150% 100% Operational activities for development Total official development assistance Development Humanitarian 23. Notwithstanding the rapid increase in humanitarian funding, United Nations entities focusing primarily on humanitarian assistance activities (such as WFP, UNHCR, UNRWA and the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Assistance), are reporting record-high gaps between budgetary requirements and funds received. 9 These gaps underscore the need to ensure that development and humanitarian activities are mutually reinforcing. This could help to reduce humanitarian needs and vulnerability and manage the risks of future humanitarian crises, ultimately reducing over time the gaps and long-term funding requirements. 24. The United Nations development system remains the largest single channel of multilateral aid for OECD/DAC donors when core and non-core flows are combined. As shown in figure IV, it accounts for nearly one third of all disbursements to multilateral organizations. The total use of the multilateral system declined in 2015 by 11 per cent, to $55.7 billion. Figure IV Channels of multilateral aid, 2015 Total use of multilateral system (2015) CORE + NON-CORE: $55.7 billion Regional Development Banks 8% Global Funds and others 17% World Bank Group 20% European Commission 22% Source: OECD.Stat United Nations development system 33% Core flows to the multilateral system (2015) CORE : $37.6 billion Regional Development Banks 8% World Bank Group 23% Global Funds and others 20% European Commission 32% Source: OECD.Stat 9 See Financial Tracking Service, available from United Nations development system 16% 17/157

18 Billions of constant 2015 United States dollars 25. The United Nations development system is the only major multilateral channel of aid that relies heavily on non-core resources. In fact, excluding the United Nations development system, 84 per cent of the resources channelled to multilateral organizations are core, while the system accounts for only 16 per cent of all core flows (figure IV). 26. Total contributions for United Nations operational activities for development reached $29.5 billion in 2016, representing an increase of nearly 8 per cent compared with This includes a 5 per cent increase in core contributions, which ended two consecutive years of decline in core funding. Core contributions grew to $6.4 billion, or 21.7 per cent of total funding in The longer-term trend shows that real growth of funding for United Nations operational activities for development has more than doubled since 2002 (see figure V). 10 Yet, despite a heavy emphasis in s of the on the quadrennial comprehensive policy review on the importance of core funding, growth in core resources has been small compared with growth in non-core resources. Figure V Real change over time in funding for United Nations operational activities for development, % +40% +98% +17% Humanitarianassistance related +194% Development related +66% Development core Development non-core Humanitarian core Humanitarian non-core Total + 104% 28. Since 2002, the core share of total funding has dropped from 37 per cent to 22 per cent and the core share of funding for development-related activities dropped from 41 per cent to 28 per cent. Only 18 per cent of total voluntary contributions for United Nations operational activities for development in 2016 were core. 29. The current nature of funding received by the United Nations development system significantly limits the system s degree of flexibility to deploy funding. The proposed funding compact is aimed at building trust and transparency with Member States and other prospective partners. This strengthened trust is essential to make the case for adequate quality and quantity of funding, including predictable levels of core funding. 10 In the present report, comparisons and trend analyses in real terms are based on amounts expressed in constant 2015 United States dollars. Owing to the minimal effect of deflators since 2015, comparisons are stated in nominal terms unless otherwise noted. 18/157

19 30. Structured dialogues have been taking place within a number of United Nations entities in an effort to address funding-related issues. Since mid-2016, 17 out of 29 entities indicated that their governing body has held such dialogues to discuss how to finance the development results agreed in their strategic plan. Some of the common themes in the dialogues across the system include: incentivizing donors to shift away from highly earmarked resources; strengthening transparency and accountability; exploring new partnership modalities towards resource mobilization; and incentivizing multi-year funding commitments. 31. The dialogues held by UNDP, UNFPA and UNICEF indicate that achieving these objectives would require strengthening the quality of regular reporting on the use of core and flexible resources, including clarity on the functions being financed through these funds. During the dialogues held at FAO, the topic of increasing assessed contributions was considered but did not gain much traction. In contrast, the decision - making body of WHO approved a 3 per cent increase in Member States assessed contributions for the period 2018/19. B. Funding to United Nations entities 32. Funding is concentrated in a relatively small number of United Nations entities, with the top eight (WFP, UNDP, UNICEF, UNHCR, WHO, UNRWA, FAO and UNFPA) accounting for 84 per cent of all contributions in Figure VI shows the core and non-core contributions received by the eight largest entities in 2016 (green bubbles) and in 2012 (blue bubbles). For the five largest entities, the non-core component exceeded the core component by a significant margin in In addition, for six of the eight entities shown, core resources were lower in 2016 compared with four years earlier. The two exceptions (UNHCR and UNRWA) are primarily focused on humanitarian assistance activities. 34. For the United Nations development system as a whole, the core share of total funding has dropped from 27.2 per cent to 21.7 per cent since 2012, indicating that the longer-term trend presented in figure V has continued in the shorter term. 19/157

20 Non-core resources (Millions ) Figure VI Contributions received by United Nations entities, 2016 Total 2016 contributions: $29.5 billion WFP => 2012 => UNHCR WFP UNDP UNHCR WHO WHO UNDP UNICEF UNICEF non-core > core 1000 FAO FAO UNFPA UNRWA core > non-core 0 UNFPA UNRWA Core resources (Millions) Note: Size of bubbles corresponds to relative total contributions (core + non-core) 1. Sources of funding 35. A total of 78 per cent of contributions in 2016 were made by Governments directly (see figure VII), including contributions provided to inter-agency pooled funds administered by a United Nations entity on behalf of the United Nations development system. Figure VII Main groups of funding sources, 2016 Total contributions in 2016: $29.5 billion NGO, private & others 8% Global funds 5% European Commission 9% Inter-agency pooled funds 5% United States 21% Governments Germany 7% 78% United Kingdom 7% Next 7 largest 20% All others 18% 36. A record high $2.6 billion was channelled to the United Nations development system through the European Commission in 2016, more than any government donor apart from the United States of America, marking an increase of 66 per cent compared with The remaining 13 per cent is accounted for by NGOs, 20/157

21 private partnerships and other multilateral institutions, including global vertical funds. 37. Figure VIII shows the core and non-core contributions by the top government donors and groups of contributors. Together, the sources of funding presented in the figure accounted for 91 per cent of total funding in Among the top 10 government contributors, only the Netherlands and Sweden provided more core funding than non-core funding. Figure VIII Main contributors, 2016 (Millions of United States dollars) Top Government contributors Groups of other contributors European Commission NGOs & Private Programme countries Inter-agency pooled funds Global Funds Local resources IFIs Core United States Germany United Kingdom Japan Sweden Norway Canada Netherlands Switzerland Australia Non-core Contributions (millions of United States dollars) 38. s on the quadrennial review have repeatedly urged the United Nations development system to explore options to broaden and diversify its donor base. Out of 29 United Nations entities, 24 indicated reporting annually to their governing body on concrete measures to broaden their donor base. However, the United Nations development system still relies heavily on a few donors. In 2016, three donors (the United States, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Germany) accounted for 45 per cent of contributions received from Governments and 35 per cent of total contributions to the United Nations development system (see figure VIII). 39. The donor base for core funding also depends on a small number of donors. Five countries (the United States, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Japan and the Netherlands) accounted for nearly 50 per cent of all core contributions from Governments in 2016, the same share for the top five core contributors based on 2011 data. 21/157

22 40. Such reliance on a limited number of donors makes the United Nations susceptible to a sudden shift in overall funding, should any of its top donors have a policy change. 41. Programme countries contributed over $1.38 billion to the United Nations development system in 2016 (excluding local resources), a moderate decrease from the $1.55 billion in contributions in Saudi Arabia accounted for about one quarter of this funding, through sizable non-core contributions to humanitarian projects in Yemen and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Contributions from other programme countries were evenly split between core and non-core funding. 42. In addition, programme countries provided $1.9 billion in local resources to finance United Nations activities in their own countries (see figure IX). This represents 8 per cent of total non-core resources to the United Nations development system. This modality is most commonly used in Latin America and the Caribbean, where it accounted for over half of all local resources provided in Figure IX Local resources contributions, by region, 2016 Local resources: $1.9 billion Western Asia, 8% Europe, 6% Americas, 58% Africa, 17% Asia/Pacific, 11% 2. Review of non-core funding modalities 43. Figure X shows the different forms of non-core resources received by the United Nations development system in 2016 and their relative volumes. Of total non-core resources, 91 per cent continue to be restrictively earmarked to single entity projects. Such high levels of earmarked funding discourage integrated approaches, often leading to increased transaction costs and fragmentation of resources. 22/157

23 Figure X Non-core funding modalities for United Nations operational activities for development, 2016 Non-core funding ($23.1 billion) Tightly earmarked non-core: 91% (Bilateral, through United Nations: 79%; Local resources: 6%; Global funds: 6%) Bilateral funds channelled through the United Nations 79% Local resources 6% Pooled 9% Global vertical funds 6% Inter-agency development pooled funds 2% Inter-agency humanitarian pooled funds 5% Thematic Funds (Entities) 2% 44. The high level of tightly earmarked contributions is often associated with persistent competition for resources, overlaps and duplication. It is clear that, under certain circumstances, competition among United Nations entities can be healthy. The 2015 DAC report on multilateral aid, 11 for instance, notes that competing sources of multilateral finance can stimulate the focus on institution-specific comparative advantages, thereby improving the efficiency of the multilateral system as a whole. However, the 2017 survey revealed that most Governments view competition among United Nations entities as unproductive. Among the possible disadvantages, 57 per cent of Governments stated that competition among United Nations entities creates confusion for the Government, and 55 per cent indicated it increases the workload of Government officials and diverts the attention of the United Nations away from the main tasks of providing support to the country. 45. The indivisible and interconnected nature of the Sustainable Development Goals has reinforced the need for more flexible, predictable and integrated multi-partner financing. To improve predictability and quality of resources, several funding modalities have been developed such that non-core funding from different sources is pooled at the level of individual entities and/or among entities. These modalities are a result of efforts by the United Nations development system to promote coherence, alignment and aid effectiveness, counterbalancing fragmentation. Inter-agency pooled funds 46. An inter-agency pooled fund is a multi-entity funding mechanism designed to support clearly defined programmatic scope and results by contributions that are co-mingled, not earmarked to a specific United Nations entity and held by a United Nations fund administrator. In these, the United Nations takes a lead role in making fund allocation decisions as well as fund implementation, which makes these funds a more flexible form of non-core contributions. 11 OECD, Multilateral Aid 2015: Better Partnerships for a Post-2015 World (Paris, 2015). 23/157

24 Deposits made to multi-donor trust funds (US$ mlllions) Share to non-core channeled through inter-agency pooled funds 47. Figure XI provides an overview of the trend in contributions made to inter-agency pooled funds, including a breakdown by theme. There has been no noteworthy growth in funding for inter-agency pooled funds since Figure XI Deposits made to United Nations-administered multi-donor trust funds, by fund category, % % Share of total non-core flows 9.1% 9.8% 10% % 7.8% 6.9% Other development funds 7.2% 7.3% 8% 1000 One Funds Transition funds Climate funds 6% 4% 500 Humanitarian assistance funds 2% Year % Source: United Nations database on inter-agency pooled funds. 48. One reason for the limited growth in funding to United Nations inter-agency pooled funds is the small number of donors that support this type of funding. In 2016, just three Government donors (the United Kingdom, Sweden and Norway) accounted for over half of all contributions to these funds, and the top eight accounted for nearly 80 per cent (figure XII). 12 The other 20 per cent of contributions came from 53 government donors, international financial institutions and the private sector. Viewed another way, 17 donors provided over 10 per cent of their 2016 non-core contributions to the United Nations to inter-agency pooled funds. 12 United Kingdom, Sweden, Norway, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark and Ireland. 24/157

25 Figure XII Top contributors to inter-agency pooled funds, Well-designed inter-agency pooled funds, which attract a significant volume of resources, can counteract some of the less positive effects of tightly earmarked non-core contributions. However, there is a risk of high transaction costs related to coordination and reporting if these funds are poorly capitalized. If there are too many such funds and they do not attract resources to generate adequate economies of scale, these funds can actually contribute to decreased efficiency and further fragmentation of resources, defeating one of their primary purposes. 50. In this context, the $1.7 billion in contributions in 2016 was distributed across 112 different inter-agency pooled funds. The four largest funds accounted for over 40 per cent of the total volume of flows to inter-agency pooled funds. On the other end of the scale, 62 funds accounted for just 5 per cent of contributions, or an average of $1.4 million each. Of these relatively small funds, 41 were joint programmes, which tend to have a more narrow scope than other types of inter-agency pooled funds. 51. Figure XIII shows the relative contributions to the 112 inter-agency pooled funds in 2016, grouped by theme. Over half of these funds have a development focus, which together attracted $168 million in resources, or 12 per cent of the total flows to inter-agency pooled funds. On the other hand, 21 humanitarian funds attracted more than $1.1 billion in resources in Transition funds, which include the United Nations Peacebuilding Fund as well as other recovery and post-conflict funds, accounted for 16 per cent of all contributions made to inter-agency pooled funds in /157

26 Figure XIII Contributions to inter-agency pooled funds, by theme, 2016 Source: United Nations database on inter-agency pooled funds. 52. The fact that development-focused pooled funds are relatively small is associated with a number of factors. Firstly, One United Nations funds, which were established to support system-wide coherence and coordination at the country-level by filling funding gaps in One United Nations programmes, have not been scaledup. Secondly, the majority of development-related pooled funds are joint programmes, which have a more limited programmatic scope compared with One United Nations funds or many of the humanitarian pooled funds. Thirdly, in 2016 the United Nations did not have a large global pooled fund on the development side, as the development equivalent of the Central Emergency Response Fund. Entity-specific thematic funds 53. Another mechanism for pooling of funding used by the United Nations development system is the agency-specific thematic fund, which receives contributions softly earmarked to outcome levels of an entity s strategic plan. This type of funding allows for multi-year spending in support of improved planning and sustainability. 54. Contributions through thematic funds have declined in recent years. A total of $407 million was provided to United Nations thematic funds in 2016 compared with $726 million in This significant drop is concerning, as it negatively affects the availability of flexible non-core resources for development-related United Nations activities. Joint programmes 55. Joint programmes support a common goal across two or more United Nations entities and include a joint budget. 56. In countries that have at least one United Nations joint programme, 85 per cent of respondents to the survey of Governments indicated that these programmes have 26/157

27 promoted greater coherence, 79 per cent said they led to greater effectiveness, while 70 per cent noted that they led to greater efficiency. 57. In 2016, there were on average 2.8 joint programmes per country team and 79 per cent of country teams had at least one joint programme, according to the UNDG information management system. The joint programmes are concentrated on a small number of Sustainable Development Goals. For instance, 109 joint programmes target Goal 4 on gender equality and 1 joint programme targets Goal 14 on oceans. Noting that a single joint programme can target multiple Goals, table 3 shows the goals that are targeted by the most and the fewest United Nations joint programmes. An increase in the number of joint programmes is not a significant measure of progress as they are cumulative (i.e. some may have started several years earlier and may have very little expenditure at this point in time). Rather, the amount of annual expenditures deployed through that modality would better capture the extent of joint work. This information, however, is currently not collected and therefore cannot be reported on meaningfully. Table 3 Number and percentage of joint programmes targeting Sustainable Development Goals Joint programmes Joint programmes Sustainable Development Goal Number Percentage Sustainable Development Goal Number Percentage Goal 4, Gender equality Goal 14, Life below water Goal 3, Good health and well-being Goal 16, Peace, justice and strong institutions Goal 8, Decent work and economic growth Goal 7, Affordable and clean energy Goal 12, Responsible consumption and production Goal 9, Industry, innovation and infrastructure Goal 2, Zero hunger Goal 17, Partnership for the Goals Global vertical funds 58. Over the past decade, global vertical funds have become a significant reso urce channel to the United Nations development system. These funds focus vertically on specific issues or themes just like global United Nations multi-donor trust funds, but are not directly administered by a United Nations entity and do not demand a Uni ted Nations lead role in the fund allocation process. Thus, while global funds are a form of pooled funding, from the perspective of the United Nations the funds are often tightly earmarked to particular projects, with the role of the United Nations solely as an implementing organization. Global vertical funds also tend to have a thematic focus and, therefore, focus on a smaller number of Sustainable Development Goals. 59. An estimated $1.63 billion, or 7 per cent, of all non-core contributions in 2016 were channelled through global funds (see figure XIV). About 57 per cent of this amount came from either the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria or the Global Environment Facility. Contributions received through global funds have more than doubled since /157

28 Figure XIV Funding from global vertical funds, Other global funds Global Environment Facility Global fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria 1. Cost recovery 60. Resolution 71/243 reiterated the importance for United Nations entities to achieve full cost recovery, that is, to avoid subsidizing non-core funded projects through core resources, as this reduces the amount of core resources available for programming. 61. The 2017 headquarters survey revealed that all except two United Nations entities 13 have adopted a cost-recovery framework aimed at collecting back the costs of non-core projects that are financed by core resources. The two exceptions indicated that steps were being taken in this regard. 62. As part of the headquarters survey, entities were also asked to present a breakdown of their expenditures in 2016 between what they classify as programme and non-programme expenses. This exercise aims to see whether entities efforts in recent years have resulted in progress towards achieving full cost recovery. Table 4 contains the cumulative data collected from 16 entities 14 that represent some 70 per cent of total funding for operational activities for development. 63. The analysis reveals that a higher proportion of core resources are used to finance non-programme costs as compared with non-core resources. Specifically, 65 per cent of core resources were spent on programme activities in 2016 compared with 89 per cent of non-core resources spent on programme activities. Overall, 84 per cent of funding is spent on programme activities. 13 Although they are not exempt from the cost-recovery mandate, this survey question excludes Secretariat departments since their cost-recovery policies are defined centrally and approved by the for the entire Secretariat. 14 UNDP (including the Capital Development Fund and UNV), UNFPA, UNICEF, UNOPS, UN-Women, WFP, UNRWA, UN-Habitat, UNAIDS, ITC, FAO, ILO, UNESCO, ECE, ESCAP and UNISDR. 28/157

29 Table 4 Breakdown of funding flows for 16 entities, 2016 (Millions of United States dollars) Type of funding flow Programme activities Programme support and management activities Other (not elsewhere classified) Total Core resources Share (percentage) Non-core resources Share (percentage) Total resources Share (percentage) There are several factors that cause full cost recovery to remain unachieved even though most United Nations entities have adopted a cost-recovery framework. 65. Firstly, not all types of non-programme costs are subject to cost recovery. For example, in the harmonized framework for UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF and UN-Women, functions mandated to benefit the broader United Nations development system and those related to establishing and implementing norms and standards across the entities programmatic and institutional areas of work were excluded from cost recovery and thereby funded entirely from core resources. 66. Secondly, waivers are granted for some contributions, meaning that the donor does not have to comply with the regular cost-recovery rate (e.g. contributions made to the law and order trust fund for Afghanistan). 67. Thirdly, discounted cost-recovery rates are charged to certain types of non-core funding, such as contributions to government cost-sharing activities or to loosely earmarked thematic funds. Applying reduced cost-recovery rates can give donors an incentive to provide certain types of contributions over others. While the logic behind these reduced rates seems sensible, it nonetheless leads to additional core resources subsidizing non-core financed projects unless there is a corresponding increase in the basic cost-recovery rate applied to other types of non-core contributions. 68. These factors can lead to an effective cost-recovery rate that is lower than the agreed rate. For instance, in 2013 the Executive Boards of UNDP, UNICEF, UNFPA and UN-Women endorsed a general harmonized cost-recovery rate of 8 per cent for non-core contributions. Table 5 shows that between 2014 and 2016, the effective rates were consistently lower than 8 per cent, leading to a lower level of recovered costs which would have gone to supplement the core budget of these entities. 29/157

30 Table 5 Effective cost-recovery rates, Entity 2014 (percentage) 2015 (percentage) 2016 (percentage) Variance versus standard 8 per cent rate (millions of United States dollars) UNDP UNFPA UNICEF UN-Women Note: The variance from the standard rate represents the difference between the effective cost - recovery amount received and the cost-recovery amount that would have been earned using the approved rate of 8 per cent. 69. A key obstacle to achieving full cost recovery appears to be the existence of an inherent conflict between the desire to avoid cross-subsidization to meet the requirements of Member States and the need to remain competitive with donors to attract voluntary funding. This further provides evidence of the need for the United Nations development system to better demonstrate its unique advantages and its value for money and to strengthen accountability through transparent reporting. C. Allocation of funds 1. distribution of funds in In 2016, total expenditures on United Nations operational activities for development amounted to $30.4 billion, of which $22.2 billion, or 73 per cent, was used for programme activities at the country level, and 27 per cent was related to (or classified as): (a) programme activities at the regional and global levels; (b) programme support and management/administration; and (c) activities not attributed to any of the other categories. 71. About 44 per cent of United Nations expenditures at the country level ($9.8 billion) was made in Africa (see figure XV). Western Asia is in second place in terms of expenditures, with 25 per cent of the share; five years earlier, in 2011, countries in Western Asia accounted for just 8 per cent of United Nations countrylevel expenditures. In absolute terms, United Nations expenditure in Africa has continued to steadily increase from $8.5 billion in 2011 to $9.8 billion in 2016, despite the significant increase in expenditures in Western Asia. 30/157

31 Figure XV Distribution of expenditures on United Nations operational activities for development, 2016 Note: The boundaries shown do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations. 72. Figures XVI (a), XVI (b) and XVI (c) show the distribution and degree of concentration of 2016 country-level expenditures in the 151 programme countries, separated into large, medium and small programme expenditures, respectively. 73. Regarding countries with large programme expenditures, there were 27 programme countries with over $200 million expenditure. Together, these countries accounted for 71 per cent of total country-level expenditures. 74. Figure XVI (a) shows that humanitarian assistance dominated the activities in eight of the nine largest programme countries (Afghanistan, the third-largest programme country, being the exception). These eight countries accounted for 58 per cent of all humanitarian expenditure at the country level. 31/157

32 Lebanon Syrian Arab Republic Afghanistan Occupied Palestinian Territory South Sudan Ethiopia Iraq Jordan Yemen Democratic Republic of the Sudan Somalia Nigeria Pakistan Zimbabwe Kenya Turkey Uganda Chad Malawi Central African Republic Niger India United Republic of Tanzania Myanmar Mali Egypt Expenditures (Millions of $US) Cumulative share of total Figure XVI Expenditures in countries, by size of expenditures (a) Countries with large expenditures (over $200 million), 2016 Expenditures exceeded $200 million in 27 out of 151 programme countries % % % 40% % 0 0% Countries (ranked largest to smallest) Development Humanitarian % of total (cumulative) 75. Figure XVI (b) shows the 45 programme countries that had between $50 and $200 million in expenditures in In contrast to countries with large expenditures, there were more expenditures on development-related activities than humanitarianrelated activities in all except three of the medium-expenditure programme countries. 32/157

33 Nepal Argentina Cameroon Bangladesh Ukraine Sierra Leone Haiti Liberia Guinea Colombia Senegal Zambia Mozambique Rwanda Philippines Burundi Madagascar China Cote d Ivoire Burkina Faso Ghana Indonesia Peru Guatemala Brazil Viet Nam Cambodia Thailand Honduras Angola Ecuador Mauritania Saudi Arabia Islamic Republic of Iran Lao People's Democratic Republic South Africa Sri Lanka Papua New Guinea Panama Fiji Tajikistan Mexico Bosnia and Herzogovina Kyrgyzstan Libya Expenditures (Millions of $US) Cumulative share of total (b) Countries with medium expenditures (between $50 million and $200 million), 2016 Expenditures were between $50 and $200 million in 45 out of 151 programme countries % % 60% % 50 20% 0 0% Countries (ranked largest to smallest) Development Humanitarian % of total (cumulative) 76. Lastly, figure XVI (c) shows the 79 programme countries that had under $50 million in country-level expenditures in This includes 43 countries with under $20 million in expenditure, which together accounted for 1.3 per cent of total expenditures. 33/157

34 Djibouti Guinea-Bissau El Salvador Algeria Benin Dominican Republic Serbia Paraguay Eritrea Georgia Democratic Republic of the Congo Timor-Leste Morocco Chile Lesotho Togo Tunisia Plurinational State of Bolivia Republic of Moldova Kazakhstan Belarus Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Armenia Uzbekistan Cuba Malaysia Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Namibia Albania Uruguay Mongolia Gambia Swaziland Costa Rica Nicaragua Kosovoa Expenditures (Millions of $US) Cumulative share of total (c) Countries with small expenditures (under $50 million), 2016 Expenditures were between $20 and $50 million in 36 out of 151 programme countries % % Kosovo a 80% Countries (ranked largest to smallest) Development Humanitarian % of total (cumulative) 34/157

35 Azerbaijan Comoros Bhutan Equatorial Guinea Cabo Verde Kuwait Samoa Montenegro Botswana Sao Tome and Principe Barbados Guyana Turkmenistan Gabon Jamaica Mauritius Maldives United Arab Emirates Solomon Islands Trinidad and Tobago Belize Bahrain Suriname Cook Islands Vanuatu Grenada Tonga Seychelles St. Kitts and Nevis Kiribati Dominica St. Vincent and the Grenadines Fed. States of Micronesia Niue St. Lucia Antigua and Barbuda Marshall Islands Tokelau Tuvalu Nauru Palau San Marino Anguilla Expenditures (Millions of $US) Cumulative share of total Expenditures were under $20 million in 43 out of 151 programme countries % % % Countries (ranked largest to smallest) Development Humanitarian % of total (cumulative) a In the context of United Nations Security Council 1244 (1999). 2. Fragmentation of resources 77. In his July 2017 report on repositioning the United Nations development system (A/72/124-E/2018/3, para. 112), the Secretary- highlighted that fragmentation and volatility are the norm and that an effective repositioning of the development system will depend, to a significant extent, on changes to current funding practices. 78. Figure XVI shows that 71 per cent of country-level expenditures are concentrated in 27 countries, with an average expenditure of $34 million per entity, per country. Furthermore, in 79 programme countries, expenditures are below $50 million. Of these, 57 countries have a resident coordinator and a United Nations country team, 15 an average of between 9 and 10 entities physically present 16 and expenditures of $2.7 million per entity per country. 79. The combination of many entities with limited amounts of resources in more than half of all programme countries along with the fact that most of these resources are restrictively earmarked shines a light on the urgency to address the fragmentation of funding. 80. The low predictability and donor-driven aspects of tightly earmarked funding make it difficult to plan and allocate resources strategically in order to strengthen coordination and coherence of activities on the ground. This is particularly concerning in the era of the Sustainable Development Goals, where the integrated nature of the 15 The other 22 programme countries are represented by a resident coordinator in a multi-country office. 16 These countries also have, on average, 4.5 non-resident entities that are members of the United Nations country team. 35/157

36 2030 Agenda calls for flexible funding that facilitates partnerships and enables a strategic deployment of resources across programmes. 81. A combination of scaling-up some of the existing funding mechanisms and creating new initiatives could be considered to alleviate some of this fragmentation. The Secretary- is identifying mechanisms pooled funds or other innovative funding sources to do so. The proposed funding compact is also aimed at improving the quantity of high quality, less earmarked non-core resources. 82. At least 15 per cent of non-core expenditures should be channelled through inter-agency pooled funds to reap the benefits of economies of scale, as estimated by UNDG. 17 In 2016, 31 programme countries reached the 15 per cent threshold (see figure XVII). This marks a notable improvement compared with 2015, when the threshold was reached for just 22 countries. In over two thirds of programme countries, less than 5 per cent of non-core expenditures were channelled through inter-agency pooled funds. Figure XVII Countries with over 10 per cent of expenditures channelled through inter-agency pooled funds, UNDG discussion paper on the role of United Nations pooled financing mechanisms to deliver the 2030 Agenda (endorsed by the Group on 28 March 2016). 36/157

37 New pooled funding initiatives 83. The nature of the 2030 Agenda requires more than ever that the funding for United Nations operational activities for development enables collective results at the country level as well as integrated approaches across multiple sectors and goals. This has resulted in new initiatives based on pooled funds. 84. In 2017, UNDG completed the design of a joint fund for the 2030 Agenda which aims to provide catalytic grants for country teams, together with partners, to unblock key bottlenecks and enhance whole-of-government approaches for coherent national policies on the Sustainable Development Goals. In addition, the United Nations, together with the European Union, launched the global Spotlight Initiative, an inter-agency pooled fund focused on eliminating all forms of violence against women and girls. It is expected that an initial investment of 500 million will be made, with the European Union as the main contributor. 3. Distribution of expenditures by country group 85. Expenditures in the least developed countries totalled $10.3 billion in 2016, which represents 46 per cent of total expenditures at the country level. Until 2014, this share had been at over 50 per cent, as shown in figure XVIII. The decline in the share is largely attributed to increasing humanitarian expenditures in middle-income countries resulting from the crises in Iraq and the Syrian Arab Republic. Out of total development-related expenditures, 49 per cent were in least developed countries in Figure XVIII Expenditures in least developed countries, /157

38 86. The average United Nations expenditure in the 47 least developed countries was $218 million in Table 6 provides an overview of how expenditures were distributed among different country groupings. The 32 landlocked developing countries received the highest expenditures per capita. Table 6 Expenditures by country group (United States dollars) Country group Number of countries Share of total country-level expenditure (percentage) Average expenditure per country (million) Expenditure per capita Least developed countries Middle-income countries Small island developing States Landlocked developing countries Africa Note: Country groups are not mutually exclusive. 87. Table 7 presents an overview and the number of entities physically present in different country groups. The average United Nations operational activities for development expenditure per entity varies considerably across the different country groups, from $18 million in the least developed countries to $1.3 million in small island developing States. Section III.D below provides further analysis on United Nations assistance by different country groups. Table 7 Expenditures and physical presence across country groups, 2016 (Millions of United States dollars) Country group Average number of resident United Nations entities per country Average expenditure per entity per country Least developed countries Middle-income countries Small island developing States Landlocked developing countries Africa D. Select funding issues 1. Increasing the impact of United Nations operational activities for development resources 88. Discussions at the global level have stressed that financing needs for meeting the Sustainable Development Goals are in the order of $5 trillion to $7 trillion 38/157

39 yearly. 18 While small in volume compared with these requirements, the funding channelled through the United Nations development system can have a significant impact, as these flows tend to be more targeted to development objectives and to direct aid to the poorest and most vulnerable than other resources flowing to and within developing countries. Furthermore, the system can use its funding as a catalyst towards additional resources, including national resources. 89. Fulfilling this potential requires a shift in mindset and approaches to countrylevel programming by United Nations country teams, in close collaboration with national Governments, as well as new skill sets and capacities for the United Nations development system, including country teams. With the development landscape becoming increasingly complex, national coordination of resources at the country level must improve significantly. The system has a key role to play in supp orting the efforts of Member States in this regard, by undertaking development finance assessments that comprehensively scan a country s financing landscape, both financial flows and policies. Such assessments can serve as a baseline for integrated national financing frameworks that take into consideration all funding sources and policies that support the broader sustainable development strategy of the country, as called for in the Addis Ababa Action Agenda and the quadrennial comprehensive policy review. 90. United Nations country teams can also support Governments with information on how to direct more financial flows towards national development priorities anchored in the Sustainable Development Goals. While the United Nations is not a financing institution, it can support Governments by identifying potential entry points and sources to leverage larger financing flows, in collaboration with different partners and actors, to support the implementation of national plans. 91. As the United Nations development system engages in innovative efforts aimed at raising additional resources, it should develop ways that accurately measure the amount of resources it is able to leverage in support of the Sustainable Development Goals, beyond just the funding that is channelled through the system. Entities would thus be able to share knowledge and best practices on innovative practices that succeeded, as well as those that did not. 92. As domestic public resources are the largest source of financing in most developing countries, their mobilization and effective use will be critical to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. The Platform for Collaboration on Tax (a joint initiative of the United Nations, IMF, OECD and the World Bank Group) was recently established to strengthen tax capacities in developing countries and provide joint guidance on a range of tax issues so that Governments can better address the tax challenges they face. This includes helping developing countries to reduce the amount of money that they lose through illicit financial flows and to raise domestic resources in fair and effective ways. This is one of the many areas that can help in increasing the flow of financing, including through more domestic investment. 2. Progress in strengthening transparency and accountability of funding 93. The high proportion of earmarked funding to the United Nations development system is partly a by-product of the funding patterns established during the era of the Millennium Development Goals. Earmarking resources can also be an attractive 18 UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2014: Investing in the Sustainable Development Goals (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.14.II.D.1). 39/157

40 option to donors as it can offer them more oversight and visibility over how their aid money is being spent, helping to justify aid spending to their constituency. 94. Nevertheless, the decline in the core resources share of funding also points to other issues, ranging from changes in the development landscape with the rise of many new development actors, to the emphasis on value for money and the impact of interventions. Reversing the decline in core funding requires significant efforts, including moving towards a whole-of-system approach that targets collective results, measures to improve effectiveness and efficiencies in terms of presence and operations, and increased transparency and accountability of the system. 95. A key element for this objective is reinforcing transparency at entity- and system-wide levels, on budgets, expenditures and results, including through accurate and comprehensive financial reporting to CEB as well as through enrolment in the International Aid Transparency Initiative. 96. Currently, 14 entities of the United Nations development system 19 are providing information through the International Aid Transparency Initiative organization standard, and the Secretary- has recently called for reinforced transparency on entity-specific expenditures and results through system-wide enrolment into the Initiative (A/72/124-E/2018/3, para. 108 (b)). A study by the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU/REP/2017/2) indicates that several large government contributors are starting to make compliance with the Initiative a prerequisite for their continued funding. 97. One of the benefits of the International Aid Transparency Initiative is that it can serve as an enabler for other data visualization platforms that help to ensure that Member States (and other stakeholders) have a clear picture of where and how the United Nations development system is spending its resources and for what purposes. DOCO, with support from UNDP in its capacity as the secretariat of the Initiative, managed the development of UNDG s first open data platform ( The platform promotes a common approach to the application of transparency standards by consolidating in one place and in real time, the financial and activity data of all 14 United Nations entities currently publishing data in accordance with the Initiative standard. The number of United Nations activities published in the standard reached 39,000 in 2016, an increase of 50 per cent compared with The UNDG data portal complements entity-specific ones that were developed in recent years to present details of an entity s activities and financing in a timely and user-friendly manner. The Joint Inspection Unit study, however, revealed that a number of donors felt that some reports and data provided by entities lacked robustness and evidence. It is clear that entities need to further improve the monitoring and reporting used to feed information into their data portals, ensuring contributors and recipients receive higher quality data on the results and outcomes achieved, rather than general descriptions of activities and actions. 99. There still remains underreporting of United Nations expenditures at the country level in the financial statistics of CEB, which is the main platform on system-wide funding flows and the basis for the funding analysis in the present report. In 2017, eight entities, 20 which together account for 10 per cent of total expenditures on 19 Or 15 United Nations entities if the United Nations Capital Development Fund and UNDP are counted separately and 18 entities if the Central Emergency Response Fund, the World Bank and the International Drug Purchase Facility are also counted (however these entities are not among those listed in box 1). 20 IFAD, ITC, UNEP, UNITAR, UNESCO, UNODC, UNWTO and PAHO (WHO Regional Office for the Americas). 40/157

41 operational activities for development, did not report to CEB on their country-level expenditures. This represents a modest improvement compared with 2016, when 12 entities accounting for 11 per cent of expenditures did not report a country-level breakdown of expenditures to CEB The mapping exercise on the functions and capacities of the United Nations development system commissioned by the Secretary- in response to the mandate of the quadrennial comprehensive policy review revealed similar weaknesses, including a lack of granular information from many United Nations entities on the use and geographical allocation of their expenditures. A number of measures are required to improve data, and these are expected to be launched in 2018 as a result of the repositioning exercise An ad hoc United Nations inter-agency team co-chaired by CEB and the UNDP Multi-Partner Trust Fund Office began work in late 2017 to improve reporting at the entity level to CEB and through the International Aid Transparency Initiative standard, making the information more complete and accurate to meet current information needs. This was in response to the need for more granular information on the allocation of resources by entities and to the quadrennial review mandate to continue to strengthen the analytical quality of system-wide reporting on funding, performance and programme results for United Nations operational activities for development. The team will work on defining the specific actions to be undertaken to produce financial data on funding flows across five dimensions: (a) the United Nations entity; (b) the function provided; (c) the geographic location; (d) the financing instrument used; and (e) the targeted integrated set of Sustainable Development Goals and targets. Integrated results and resources framework 102. At the headquarters level, integrated results and resources frameworks are intended to hold entities accountable for the funding entrusted to them by linking the resources of entities to strategic plan results. Out of 29 United Nations entities responding to the headquarters survey, 27 indicated that all projected resources of their organization were consolidated within an integrated results and resources framework based on priorities determined in the respective strategic plan. The other two entities indicated that this will be done starting in Feedback received through the headquarters survey shows that nearly every entity is implementing an integrated results and resources framework. It also revealed, however, that actual contributions regularly fall short of the estimates provided in the approved framework. One large entity indicated that it presents aspirational rather than realistic estimates in the framework, thus also ensuring that its budgets would not be exceeded. Such practices should be avoided as they reduce transparency and accountability. Common budgetary framework 104. At the country level, the common budgetary framework is an integral part of UNDAF (or similar planning instrument) and enables United Nations country teams to present all planned and costed United Nations programme activities in one place, in support of a better coordinated delivery by country teams. An annual common budgetary framework is an annualized version of the medium-term common budgetary framework and provides a more realistic projection of financial needs, funding availability and funding gaps. 41/157

42 105. As called for in the quadrennial review, a medium-term common budgetary framework in every programme country should be viewed as a minimum requirement. According to the UNDG information management system, 59 per cent of United Nations country teams currently have a medium-term common budgetary framework, while 30 per cent of them have an annual common budgetary framework, indicating that there is still significant room for improvement. The new open data platform developed by UNDG will begin digitizing UNDAFs and their associated common budgetary frameworks beginning in 2018, which could make these frameworks more streamlined and transparent The proposed system-wide strategic document (A/72/684-E/2018/7, annex) may help in addressing some of the aforementioned issues. IV. Enabling programme countries to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals 107. The primary role of the United Nations development system is to support Governments to achieve the 2030 Agenda, of which poverty eradication is the overarching objective. To that end, in 71/243 on the quadrennial comprehensive policy review, the calls on the system to perform some critical functions, including integrated policy and normative support, capacity development, leveraging partnerships and supporting South-South and triangular cooperation. The quadrennial review calls for a whole-of-system response based on stronger cross-pillar work, particularly in terms of greater cooperation and complementarity across development, humanitarian and sustaining-peace activities. The also calls upon all entities of the system to continue to promote women s empowerment and gender equality The United Nations remains the Member States preferred partner of choice to deliver on its key functions. As table 8 shows, Governments were asked to assess the performance of the United Nations system compared with other development partners, and respondents selected the top two partners that best satisfied their country s needs in terms of select performance factors. The United Nations comes first in each of the seven areas listed in the table, with progress on key functions outlined in the following paragraphs. Table 8 Countries preferred providers of external support, by type of support, 2017 Question: Select UP TO TWO partners that you consider to be the preferred provider of each type of support. United Nations system (agencies, funds and programmes) Bretton Woods institutions Other multilateral and regional institutions not part of the United Nations OECD/DAC partners Southern partners Thematic or alliancebased partners (e.g. Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria) Ranked first Ranked second Number of times selected Strengthening national capacities Providing evidence-based and, where appropriate, integrated policy advice /157

43 Question: Select UP TO TWO partners that you consider to be the preferred provider of each type of support. United Nations system (agencies, funds and programmes) Bretton Woods institutions Other multilateral and regional institutions not part of the United Nations OECD/DAC partners Southern partners Thematic or alliancebased partners (e.g. Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria) Ranked first Ranked second Number of times selected Assisting countries through support with norms and standards Sectoral programming advice and technical assistance Direct support and service delivery Peace and security Humanitarian assistance Source: 2017 survey of programme country Governments. A. Eradicating poverty and leaving no one behind 109. As expressed in the 2012 quadrennial comprehensive policy review ( 67/226) and reaffirmed in the 2016 quadrennial review ( 71/243), eradicating poverty is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable requirement for sustainable development. Member States recognize poverty eradication as the top priority and objective of United Nations opera tional activities for development, and that no one should be left behind. Reaching those who are furthest behind first is about prioritizing the dignity of human beings and ensuring that every individual has the opportunity to realize the rights underpinni ng the Sustainable Development Goals Many United Nations entities consider the overarching principle of poverty eradication and the pledge to reach those furthest behind first in the 2030 Agenda as already within the scope of their entity s mandate, and have not articulated any new policies in this regard. Entities without explicit mandates on poverty eradication, such as OHCHR, UNHCR and UNISDR, are responding by applying the principle of leaving no one behind in ways that are relevant to their mandates The 2015 and 2017 surveys by the Department of Economic and Social Affairs asked both Governments and resident coordinators the extent to which they agreed that the United Nations ensures adequate attention and resources are given to the development needs of the poorest and most vulnerable segments of society. As shown in figure XIX, resident coordinators were far more likely to strongly agree with this statement than Governments. 43/157

44 Figure XIX Ensuring focus towards the most vulnerable Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme countries and survey of resident coordinators Evidence suggests that the United Nations is successful in assisting Governments to identify the furthest behind, and to a lesser degree in helping Governments to actually reach this population with material support or programmatic interventions (see figure XX). While 37 per cent of Governments indicated that the United Nations system supports them to identify those farthest behind to a great extent, only 24 per cent reported that the system is effective to a great extent in reaching them. Commenting on why this is the case, some Governments indicated that the United Nations is unable to reach the furthest behind owing to scarcity of resources or because they failed to consult with grass-roots civil society groups. One responding Government with a large humanitarian crisis explained that the United Nations was not reaching the poorest populations in more peaceful parts of the country because it was devoting the majority of its resources to stabilizing conflict zones. Another Government reported that it was not able to assess the performance of the United Nations in this area because the country team did not share their budgets or operational expenditures. 44/157

45 Figure XX United Nations support in identifying and reaching those furthest behind core 18% Don't know, 1% Identify those that are furthest behind Not at all, 2% To a great extent 37% To a moderate extent 43% To a small extent 17% non-core 41% Reach the furthest behind first core 18% To a great extent 24% To a moderate extent Don't know, 2% 52% Not at all, 4% To a small extent 17% non-core 41% Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme country Governments Low-income countries are more likely to respond that the United Nations system assisted in reaching the furthest behind first to a great extent than countries with higher incomes (see figure XXI). Around a quarter of all countries replied to a small extent, not at all or don t know on these questions. However, this share falls notably in the group of countries which are further advanced in implementation of standard operating procedures, possibly indicating that integrated ways of working do support Governments to reach those furthest behind. Figure XXI United Nations support to reaching those furthest behind, by income group Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme country Governments In the survey, 86 per cent of resident coordinators agreed that the UNDAF or its equivalent framework 21 addresses how the United Nations country team 21 For the purposes of the present report, all references to UNDAFs are inclusive of their equivalent frameworks. 45/157

46 will reach the furthest behind first. However, when asked to highlight innovative strategies being used to that effect, the responses were limited to traditiona l and broad-based actions (see box 2), indicating further thinking is needed to strengthen the system s reach to those left furthest behind. This speaks of the importance to strengthen capacities and skill sets of the system to be fit to deliver on the Agenda. Furthermore, addressing data gaps will be central to reaching those left behind. Box 2 Innovative strategies to reach those furthest behind Resident coordinators were invited to highlight any innovative strategies in the UNDAF that the United Nations country team is pursuing in order to reach the furthest behind first. Responses included: Enhancing community involvement in the definition of target groups Focusing on the poorest regions of a country Social inclusion being an important theme of the UNDAF Improving data collection to plan and measure progress Improving public access to such data Taking a human-rights based approach Conducting a public perception survey around the Sustainable Development Goals Establishing a United Nations office in the most disadvantaged region Addressing youth unemployment Including a specific UNDAF outcome focusing on indigenous people, women and youth Focusing on ethnic minorities Involving a very wide range of stakeholders in the common country analysis Undertaking vulnerability assessments Strengthening linkages between development and humanitarian actions 115. The survey of programme country Governments asked respondents to select the five most important areas, organized by the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, where: (a) the United Nations contribution over the past two years had been especially significant; and (b) United Nations assistance will be required over the next four years. Analysis of the data by income grouping and country typology is provided in sections III.E and F The five goals where the United Nations development system has made the most contributions over the past two years are primarily the unfinished business of the Millennium Development Goals. Health is the topmost area according to both the 2015 and the 2017 surveys, followed by food security, nutrition and eradicating hunger; poverty eradication; gender equality; and education, which were also among the top 10 areas in previous surveys. The results are shown in figure XXII. 46/157

47 Figure XXII Areas where the United Nations contribution has been especially significant (last two years) and where assistance will be needed (next four years) Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme country Governments. 47/157

48 117. Looking forward, in order of priority for United Nations assistance over the next four years, Governments identified poverty (Goal 1), health (Goal 3), productive employment and sustainable economic growth (Goal 8), combating climate change and its impacts (Goal 13), and affordable and clean energy (Goal 7) Those five goals were not among the most mentioned areas regarding past performance. This suggests that the United Nations system may need to boost its capacities in the areas that go beyond the unfinished business of the Millennium Development Goals No Government selected responsible consumption and production (Goal 12) as an area where the United Nations contribution over the past two years had been especially significant, which may reflect the lack of a natural institutional home for this Goal. B. Supporting capacity development 120. Through the quadrennial review, Member States have consistently reaffirmed that capacity development is a core function of the United Nations (see s 67/226 and 71/243). Most Governments agree that the United Nations development system has been effective in developing national capacities. As shown in figure XXIII, 18 per cent of Governments strongly agree and 71 per cent agree to that statement, which is consistent with results from previous surveys. Figure XXIII Effectiveness in building national capacities Question: All things considered, the United Nations has been effective in developing national capacities: Disagree 10% Don t know 1% Strongly agree 18% Agree 71% Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of programme country Governments. 48/157

49 121. Support by the United Nations development system to strengthening national capacities is particularly strong in the area of planning, but less so regarding management and evaluation. As shown in table 9, most Governments agree that the United Nations has contributed overall to strengthening national capacities regarding planning, management, evaluation and statistics. Yet, 20 per cent of Governments disagreed that the system had contributed to strengthening national capacities in management, with the percentages for evaluation and statistics standing at 23 per cent and 11 per cent, respectively. Table 9 Strengthening national capacities (Percentage) Response to survey question by programme country Governments The United Nations has contributed to the strengthening of national capacities in: Planning Management Evaluation Statistics Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree 1 1 Don t know Total Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme country Governments The United Nations is viewed by programme countries as both contributing to building national capacities to engage in partnerships and playing a catalytic role to facilitate them (see figure XXIV). However, countries view the United Nations as more active in directly facilitating partnerships (where 87 per cent of countries agreed to a moderate or large extent) than in building national capacities for partnerships (where 78 per cent agreed), thus possibly indicating the need for strengthened skills sets in United Nations country teams in that regard. 49/157

50 Figure XXIV United Nations support towards building partnerships Question: The United Nations has contributed to building the capacity of the country to engage in partnerships To a large extent 26% To a moderate extent 52% To a small extent 4% Not at all 2% Don't know 16% Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme country Governments. Question: The United Nations plays a catalytic role in facilitating partnerships To a moderate extent 69% To a large extent 7% To a small extent 6% Don't know 36% Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme country Governments. 50/157

51 Use of national institutions and systems 123. There is scope for progress on the use of national systems and institutions by the United Nations development system. Although using national systems and institutions is a key element in bolstering national capacities, it is still not the default approach, where appropriate, of United Nations entities in implementing countrylevel activities. As illustrated in figure XXV, few Governments strongly agreed that the United Nations uses national institutions in the design of programmes and projects as much as possible, compared with nearly half of resident coordinators who strongly agreed. In other areas such as procurement, financial systems, monitoring and reporting, and with regard to evaluation, there was even less agreement that national capacities were being used as much as possible. Feedback from Governments suggests that using national systems and institutions is a significant aspect of strengthening them. In this regard, the data suggest there is significant scope for improvement across the board. Figure XXV Utilization of national systems and institutions by the United Nations development system Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of programme country Governments and Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of resident coordinators. Coordinated approaches to capacity development 124. Achieving the 2030 Agenda requires a more systematic, coordinated and comprehensive approach to capacity development. The quadrennial comprehensive policy review in 2012 called for the development of a United Nations development system joint approach to capacity development, based on common methodology and standards; action on the request remains pending The findings of two recent studies by the Joint Inspection Unit indicate that a coordinated approach across the United Nations development system on capacity development does not exist. In a study which assessed 36 UNDAF evaluations 51/157

52 conducted between 2009 and 2014 (JIU/REP/2016/6), the Unit found that, despite being a programming principle, capacity development is seldom mentioned in UNDAF evaluations and is insufficiently articulated in UNDAF activities, resulting in a significant programmatic gap. In a study that was more specifically on strengthening national statistical capacities (JIU/REP/2016/5), the Unit found that there was no overarching plan on the efforts to clarify the respective roles and division of labour among the various United Nations entities To ensure that efforts to develop national capacities are systematic and coordinated, United Nations country teams need to engage in joint analyses and needs assessments. The 2017 UNDAF guidance sets out as a minimum requirement the development of a high-quality, evidence-based common country analysis, part of which includes an assessment of the capacities of Governments and other relevant stakeholders. In the same vein, Governments see the need for a more thorough analysis of needs, improved coordination among United Nations entities and an approach to national capacity development that is more comprehensive and has strong national ownership In the context of leaving no one behind, a joint approach for capacitybuilding is vital, especially in terms of data collection and analysis Surveys indicate that data disaggregation around the dimensions of racial diversity, religion and disability remains limited. As shown in figure XXVI, most resident coordinators find official data disaggregated by income, sex and age to be adequate or partially adequate, while data on persons with disabilities, ethnicity, rac e and religion less so, and in many countries, unavailable. Figure XXVI Degree of access to various categories of official data Question: Please indicate whether the United Nations country team has access to official government data on: 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Age 60% 36% 4% Income level 59% 32% 8% Sex 59% 38% 4% Religion 43% 32% 25% Ethnicity 32% 42% 26% Race 29% 30% 41% Disability 28% 54% 18% Adequate Partially adequate Not available Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of resident coordinators. 52/157

53 129. While the United Nations has improved in terms of integrated work for capacity-building with regard to data, much more needs to be done on this front. As shown in figure XXVII, 78 per cent of resident coordinators agree that United Nations entities are working more or much more closely together, compared with four years ago, to support capacity-building on disaggregated data collection and analysis. The share of Governments who agree with this statement remains, however, lower (66 per cent). The fact that 28 per cent of Governments failed to note any change provides further evidence that more remains to be done in many countries. Figure XXVII Collaboration in capacity-building around data Question: Compared to four years ago, how closely have United Nations agencies worked together to support capacity building on disaggregated data collection and analysis: 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 18% 19% Much more closely 48% 59% 28% 21% 5% 1% 1% 0% More closely No change Less closely Much less closely Programme Country Governments Resident Coordinators Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of programme country Governments and survey of resident coordinators The United Nations development system is improving its own capacity for data literacy, technology, collection and analysis at disaggregated levels, in alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals. A 2017 DOCO desk review of 23 UNDAFs signed between 2015 and 2017, found that 20 UNDAFs planned capacity-development support to national statistics institutions for evidencebased policymaking and programme design. The study does not indicate whether the capacity-development support indicated in the frameworks was part of a coordinated effort by the county team or an entity-specific activity. In February 2017, UNDG published guidelines to support country reporting on the Sustainable Development Goals. In addition, UNDG joined forces with the Global Pulse initiative and its Privacy Advisory Group to design common principles for data privacy and protection so as to optimize the use of big data towards implementing the 2030 Agenda In addition, many Governments requested support from the United Nations development system in preparing a voluntary national review. Since 2016, 53/157

54 65 countries have presented such a review. Of these, 40 responded to the Department of Economic and Social Affairs surveys stating they had presented a voluntary national review, among which 35 reported having received United Nations support. C. Providing integrated policy advice 132. The quadrennial comprehensive policy review calls upon the United Nations development system to provide high quality, evidence-based, integrated policy advice As illustrated in table 10, while Governments largely agree that United Nations policy advice is evidence-based and tailored to the country s needs and priorities, there is scope to improve on the policy advice being provided in an integrated fashion where appropriate. Table 10 Provision of policy advice (Percentage) The United Nations provides policy advice, tailored to national needs and priorities, that is: Response to survey question by programme country Governments Evidence-based Provided jointly Strongly agree Agree Disagree 2 10 Strongly disagree Don t know 5 11 Total Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme country Governments There are varying degrees of coordination of policy advice across different United Nations entities. As shown in figure XXVIII, 65 per cent of resident coordinators agreed that the United Nations country team generally provides policy advice through coordinated process, while 22 referred to single entity processes and 13 per cent to joint ones. Resident coordinators noted that the degree of coordination varied with the topic. Cross-cutting issues such as gender-based violence are more likely to be well coordinated. Several resident coordinators also noted that country team results groups were helpful to ensure coordinated and, where needed, integrated approaches to policy advice. 54/157

55 Figure XXVIII Coordination and/or integration of policy advice Question: The United Nations country team generally provides policy advice developed through a process that is: Single entity 22% Coordinated 65% Integrated 13% Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of resident coordinators The report of the Secretary- of July 2017 on repositioning the United Nations development system identifies strengthening the policy backbone of the development system to be an urgent undertaking and recognizes that providing integrated policy advice will require the system to function in a new way, with system entities delivering multi-disciplinary advice with one voice, as well as strengthened capacities for data management and innovative solutions at the country level. D. Assisting countries through normative support 136. The quadrennial review calls on the United Nations development system to assist countries through normative support. This involves supporting the development of global norms and standards, assisting Member States to integrate and align national legislation and policies to agreed norms and standards, and the provision of monitoring and review mechanisms to encourage compliance. For many entities, particularly the specialized agencies, this type of work constitutes the core of their mandate Most organizations within the United Nations development system are involved in normative work to varying extents, including funds, programmes, specialized agencies and affiliated organizations The normative work of the United Nations in promoting global norms and standards is one of its key comparative advantages. It sets universally applicable norms and standards for peace and security, economic and sociocultural development, human rights, the rule of law, health and environmental sustainability, among others. The scope of normative work has a wide range, from developing protocols, 55/157

56 establishing norms and guidelines, monitoring and reporting on implementation of conventions and advocacy, to disseminating normative products, among many other things At the country level, the 2017 DOCO desk review of 23 UNDAFs revealed that all the frameworks had included efforts to employ a human rights-based approach and to define specific contributions to the realization of human rights. The solid performance of the United Nations development system is confirmed by Governments (table 8), as the United Nations development system was selected as one of two preferred providers by 42 programme country Governments to assist through provision of support on norms and standards. Somewhat unexpectedly, the Bretton Woods institutions follow as a close second as the preferred provider According to the UNDG information management system, in 2016, 61 per cent of United Nations country teams engaged in the preparation, reporting or follow-up of the universal periodic reviews, 73 per cent facilitated government follow-up of recommendations of treaty bodies and 38 per cent facilitated government follow-up of recommendations by the human rights special procedures mechanisms A recent study by the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU/REP/2016/6) found that while considerable efforts had been made by United Nations country teams to apply a human rights-based approach and promote gender equality, there was less clarity as to how these principles were being integrated into UNDAF programming, and the Unit recommended a systematic approach to address this gap. At the corporate level, UNDG has supported engagement with, reporting to and follow-up on international human rights mechanisms, including through the publication of a web-based guide on strengthening engagement with the international human rights machinery 22 and annual letters to resident coordinators on upcoming opportunities to engage with United Nations human rights mechanisms As communications are key to supporting better linkages between the normative and operational aspects of the work of United Nations country teams, resident coordinators were asked about the extent to which the country team joint communication strategy (where one exists) contributed to that objective (see figure XXIX). 22 Available from 56/157

57 Figure XXIX Promoting linkages between the normative and operational activities of the United Nations Question: In your opinion, to what extent does the joint communications strategy promote adequate linkages between the United Nations' normative and operational activities: Not at all 1% To a small extent 16% To a large extent 32% To a moderate extent 51% Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of resident coordinators. Note: A total of 87 resident coordinators responded to this question. The remaining resident coordinators stated that the country team did not have a joint communications strategy While the 2017 desk review of 23 UNDAFs shows that there was progress in terms of applying a human rights-based approach to the common country analysis, there is ample scope to better link the normative and operational dimensions by further strengthening integration of human rights standards and principles in the analysis and feeding the human rights-based approach into the programming work of the country team on the ground, as well as doing so jointly in a manner that cuts across traditional sectoral and thematic silos, in view of the integrated nature of the Sustainable Development Goals. E. Reinforcing assistance to least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing States 144. The 2016 quadrennial review calls on the United Nations development system to address the special challenges facing the most vulnerable countries in implementing the 2030 Agenda, in particular the least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing States. These challenges include, inter alia, limited institutional capacity, low accumulation of human a ssets, dependence on ODA, climate change and high vulnerability to external shocks. 57/157

58 Combined, these countries account for a sixth of the world s population living in 91 Member States. Figure XXX Alignment with national needs, priorities and plans Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of programme country Governments. Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of programme country Governments The degree to which the United Nations system s activities are perceived by Governments to be aligned with national needs and priorities varies across country groupings (see figure XXX). Interestingly, survey data shows that the landlocked developing countries were three times more likely than small island developing States to affirm that United Nations development system activities were very closely 58/157

59 aligned with national needs and priorities; and landlocked developing countries were much more likely, at 46 per cent, to strongly agree that the UNDAF has assisted with alignment, compared with small island developing States (35 per cent) and least developed countries (37 per cent). Least developed countries 146. With close to half of all country-level expenditure (see sect. II.C.3), least developed countries benefit from special attention from the United Nations development system to face key challenges, including low levels of human development and economic and structural vulnerabilities and handicaps to growth that limit resilience The quadrennial review called for the United Nations development system to work in a coordinated manner in support of the Technology Bank for the Least Developed Countries, which is a new entity created by the in December 2016 to improve the use of scientific and technological solutions in the poorest countries and promote their integration into the knowledge-based economy. The Bank is being operationalized with the signing of the host country agreement with the Government of Turkey. To date, Turkey has pledged a $2 million annual contribution to the Bank, and four other countries have pledged a combined amount of $455, Least developed countries are far more positive in their assessment of United Nations assistance to identify those furthest behind, compared with landlocked developing countries and particularly compared with small island developing States (see figure XXXI). That the system has devoted more attention to this topic in the least developed countries is likely a confluence of both greater needs and more readily available resources for this group of countries. Figure XXXI Identifying those that are furthest behind Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of programme country Governments Some United Nations development system entities are yet to start using the least developed country category in their allocation of development assistance 59/157

60 and support measures. The Committee for Development Policy surveyed entities in the system regarding recognition of that category. The answers indicated that entities recognized the category and that all entities make contributions to their development in various degrees. Yet, the recognition of the category does not appear to translate into a consistent application of priorities and budget allocation. Most entities do not have operational guidelines with clear budget targets, nor rules for budget allocations to least developed countries. This may result in unpredictable resource flows to least developed countries. Furthermore, most United Nations development system entities group the least developed countries alongside other country groupings to assign similar priority status and special priority treatment. In addition, there are large variations in the type and level of specific assistance to least developed countries, often based on the entities own policies, priorities and criteria, which may not necessarily relate to least developed country status The 2016 quadrennial review requested the United Nations development system to improve its support to graduating countries in the formulation and implementation of their national transition strategies. One country, Equatorial Guinea, graduated in 2017, and more than a dozen may meet the criteria for graduation by The survey of programme country Governments included six countries that had graduated (or were scheduled to graduate) from least developed country status in the past four years. Responses suggest that the effectiveness of United Nations support in the formulation of national transition strategies was broadly positive: two countries strongly agreed that the support had been effective, three agreed, and one disagreed. The secretariat of the Committee for Development Policy is building a web-based tool to help prospective least developed country graduates better understand the graduation process and to support them in developing graduation strategies to address the end of their access to special international support measures. Landlocked developing countries 151. In recognition of the specific challenges faced by landlocked developing countries, the urged the United Nations development system to continue to enhance its support including through the Vienna Programme of Action for Landlocked Developing Countries for the Decade By definition, landlocked developing countries lack access to the sea, but they are also typically affected by infrastructure deficiencies and poor trade facilitation, which results in high transit and trade costs, typically leading to weak economic growth and limited overall socioeconomic development Of the 32 landlocked developing countries, half (16) are in Africa, 10 are in Asia, two are in Latin America and four are in Europe. More than half (17) of all landlocked developing countries are also least developed countries, of which 13 are in Africa. Among the least developed countries, those that are also landlocked developing countries generally perform less well, reflecting more limited producti ve capacities and competitiveness and higher reliance on the economic and political situations of neighbouring countries The survey of programme country Governments enquired about the degree of alignment between United Nations activities and national priorities. Figure XXX shows that landlocked developing countries were the most satisfied with the degree of alignment between United Nations activities and national priorities, with 58 per cent indicating very close alignment, while small island developing States were the least satisfied (at 18 per cent). For landlocked developing countries, 60/157

61 the degree of perceived alignment is similar to that of programme countries as a whole. Small island developing States 154. In view of their specific social, economic and environmental vulnerabilities, the 2016 quadrennial review also urges the United Nations development system to enhance its support to small island developing States including for the implementation of the SIDS Accelerated Modalities of Action (SAMOA) Pathway. The small island developing States are mostly geographically dispersed, with small populations, small domestic markets, limited economies of scale, high costs for utilities and high costs for transport to access foreign markets due to distance. Small island developing States also suffer from limited resilience to natural disasters, which frequently have catastrophic economic impacts, not only because of recovery costs but also because of the impact on tourism, which is often one of the main economic sectors of these States Small island developing States have a markedly more negative view than other country groups on the alignment of United Nations activities to national needs and priorities, with only 18 per cent of these States reporting these as very closely aligned, compared with a figure of 37 per cent of all other Governments (see figure XXX). In a similar vein, only 10 per cent of small island developing States strongly agree that the United Nations provides evidence-based policy advice that is tailored to national needs and priorities, while for all other Governments this was 30 per cent. These differences indicate that there is room for improvement in tailoring the system s support to the needs of small island developing States The UNDAF seems to be a tool that Governments agree could assist in this regard. While small island developing States were less likely than least developed countries and landlocked developing countries to agree that the UNDAF can help to ensure alignment, 84 per cent of small island developing States either strongly agreed or agreed that the UNDAF had enabled the Government to ensure that the activities of the United Nations were closely aligned with national plans and strategies, including on the delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals In response to where the United Nations development system has provided an especially significant contribution in the past two years, small island developing States pointed to combating climate change as the top area for support. In fact, small island developing States were far more likely, at 72 per cent, than other Member States (44 per cent) to identify combating climate change as a top area of support. The second top area of support in the past two years for small island developing States was health and well-being (69 per cent), followed by gender (62 per cent), where the figure for small island developing States was at least 10 percentage points higher than the overall figures for all countries (see survey report for details) In considering where United Nations assistance will be most required in the coming four years, 66 per cent of small island developing States again pointed to combating climate change as their top area where support will be needed, followed by productive employment and sustainable economic growth, and then by poverty eradication As highlighted in section IV on country presence, some 24 small island developing States are provided with United Nations support through a multi-country 23 Forthcoming. Will be available from 61/157

62 office modality. The largest are the Fiji and Barbados multi-country offices, each of which covers 10 small island developing States In the survey of programme country Governments, 79 per cent of small island developing States agreed that the United Nations presence is adequately tailored for meeting the specific challenges of the country. This included 11 per cent that strongly agreed. For countries other than small island developing States, the level of agreement was 89 per cent, including 15 per cent that strongly agreed. The lower level of agreement among small island developing States is not surprising, given that only 18 per cent of these States felt that the efforts of the United Nations development system were very closely aligned with national needs and priorities, compared with 37 per cent of other countries. F. Supporting middle-income countries to address continuing and emerging challenges 161. Middle-income countries are a heterogeneous group, comprising 54 lowe r- middle-income countries and 56 upper-middle-income countries. There is considerable diversity within middle-income countries in terms of ODA allocation criteria (with 18 least developed countries, 18 landlocked developing countries and 28 small island developing States) and regional diversity (with 26 middle-income countries in Africa, 25 in the Americas, 36 in the Asia-Pacific region and 10 in Western Asia). Recognizing the diversity among middle-income countries is a critical aspect of providing effective support, tailored to both continuing and emerging challenges of these countries, as called for in the quadrennial review Given that the middle-income countries group contains more than two thirds of all programme countries, it is not surprising that this diverse group accounted for 60 per cent of all country-level expenditure in Perhaps more interestingly, nearly half, or 48.5 per cent, of core resources expenditures were spent in lower-middleincome countries, a group which includes 17 of the least developed countries Middle-income countries confront complex and diverse realities. This is reflected in the top areas selected by middle-income country Governments as requiring the most United Nations assistance in the next four years (see the survey report for a full list of middle-income country top selected areas). Poverty eradication is reflected as the top area across all middle-income countries. Combating climate change and its impacts (Sustainable Development Goal 13) was regarded as a top area for United Nations assistance over the next four years by most middle-income countries; this coincides with the needs for United Nations assistance of high-income programme countries, which also place combating climate change towards the top of the list. Education (Goal 4) is another top-five area identified by both lower- and upper-middle-income countries as key for United Nations assistance that is shared by high-income countries but not by low-income ones Resident coordinators in middle-income countries highlighted the steady move away from direct support and towards policy advice and innovative thinking around resource mobilization for the Sustainable Development Goals. In this regard, one resident coordinator also commented that expertise, approach and financing are fragmented across many entities, impeding the country team from providing integrated high-level policy support on the Goals The ambition of the 2030 Agenda needs to be met with bold changes in the way the United Nations development system operates. In the case of providing support to 62/157

63 middle-income countries, this implies a gradual shift from a traditional model of direct support and service provision towards greater emphasis on integrated high - quality policy advice, capacity development and support with leveraging partnerships and financing. G. Partnerships 166. Critical to the success of the 2030 Agenda is an underlying vision where Governments, the private sector, civil society and the United Nations work together to find new ways to leverage genuine partnerships for sustainable growth, including by mobilizing all available resources. 1. Global and institutional level partnerships 167. The United Nations continues to engage in partnerships through a number of avenues across the system. The United Nations Office for Partnerships, the Global Compact Office, WHO and the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, among others, have a mandate to promote global and multi-stakeholder partnerships. United Nations development system entities are also actively involved in jointly pursuing multi-stakeholder partnerships at the global level, such as the Every Woman, Every Child initiative, the Sustainable Energy for All initiative and the Global Initiative on Decent Jobs for Youth Individual United Nations development system entities also engage with a large number of partners. UNHCR, for example, reports having 929 partners for implementation across all regions of the world, 310 strategic agreements signed with NGOs, the United Nations, academia, the private sector, governmental agencies, intergovernmental organizations, foundations and think tanks, and 60 private and corporate partnerships. Similarly, WFP noted having over 1,500 current partnership arrangements However, few United Nations entities report tracking the status and results of partnerships, or share knowledge and best practices on their existing partnerships and strategies. UNHCR conducts an annual independent survey on partnerships while monitoring performance throughout the year. It has also established a partner portal which is being expanded for use by UNICEF and WFP. In addition, the UNICEF monitoring and reporting platform annually tracks the status of its partnerships, including results. These initiatives could be a model for other entities to build on Furthermore, the United Nations development system is mandated in the quadrennial review to assist Governments in leveraging their own partnerships and to act as a convener of stakeholders across constituencies. To effectively play this role, country teams need to develop the necessary skill sets and gain a better understanding of the available resources. Among other important areas, including partnerships to mobilize technology, knowledge and expertise, the United Nations development system has a key role to play in supporting Governments to take advantage of diversified and innovative funding sources that could complement traditional sources, and to align private financial flows with the 2030 Agenda. Aligning private financial flows with the 2030 Agenda requires that Governments and markets build awareness and trust, align regulations and enable innovative instruments to foster risk-sharing and accountability. In this regard, UNDP has created a tool called the development finance assessment tool, which provides planning and finance ministries with data and analysis on the changing picture of a country s 63/157

64 development finance. The assessment also produces recommendations on how development finance in a country can better support the achievement of national priorities and results, including the Sustainable Development Goals (see sect. II.D.1) Despite notable examples, it is clear that much remains to be done to ensure that the United Nations development system has the right skill sets to assist Member States. Overall, adequate system-wide policies, mechanisms and guidelines are required to both: (a) address risks related to preserving the legitimacy, integrity and independence of the United Nations in the face of new partnerships, particularly with the private sector; and (b) maximize the effectiveness and efficiencies of partnerships. 2. Country-level partnerships 172. At the country level, 76 per cent of all country teams collaborated with external partners during 2016 on a range of areas, in particular gender equality; education; health; peace, justice and strong institutions; and employment/decent work. Of the 99 country teams that stated that they engaged with partners, most partnerships took place with civil society (87 per cent), local governments (72 per cent), parliamentarians (63 per cent), the private sector (59 per cent) and other actors (30 per cent), which includes donors/development partners and academia, religious partners and international NGOs (see figure XXXII). The considerably low level of collaboration with development partners, donors and academia is further substantiated by the findings of the 2017 UNDAF desk review, which suggest that the overall engagement of multilateral banks and international financial institutions with UNDAFs seems to be narrowly concentrated in the financing stage, rather than throughout the UNDAF process. Furthermore, enhanced interaction with academia remains vital in keeping up to date with the evolving body of knowledge innovation and policy research, which are fundamental to achieving the 2030 Agenda. Figure XXXII Collaboration with external partners, 2016 Of the 99 United Nations country teams that specified that they convene partners beyond the United Nations for specific policy activities, the following partners were identified (where multiple partners were selected by each country team) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Civil society Local government Parliamentarians Private sector Other Source: UNDG information management system. Source: UNDG information management system. 64/157

65 173. There is room to intensify engagement, particularly with private sector actors (see figure XXXIII). Governments and resident coordinators were asked whether country teams engage as much as possible with partners. Resident coordinators tend to assess the current levels of engagement as quite high, particularly in terms of engaging with bilateral and multilateral actors, as shown below. Resident coordinators also judge engagement with civil society to be substantial, while engagement with the private sector is deemed to be considerably lower. Overall, Governments are of the view that there is much more scope for engagement by the system with all partners, in particular with the private sector. The review of the role of the Global Compact and its application in the context of country teams, including to enhance engagement with entrepreneurs and the private sector, may prove as one helpful measure in further advancing engagement with the private sector on the ground. Figure XXXIII Engagement in partnerships by the United Nations country team Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of programme country Governments and Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of resident coordinators The United Nations remains largely the preferred partner of choice by programme country Governments for support on global, regional and national issues (see table 11). Governments were invited to assess the performance of the United Nations system in relation to that of other types of development partners, by selecting the top two development partners that best support the country s needs in different categories. 65/157

66 Table 11 Countries preferred providers of external support, by support category Question: Select UP TO TWO partners that you consider to be the preferred provider of each type of support United Nations system (agencies, funds and programmes) Bretton Woods institutions Other multilateral and regional institutions not part of the United Nations OECD/DAC partners Southern partners Thematic or alliance-based partners (e.g. the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria) Ranked first Ranked second Number of times selected Global challenges requiring common action (e.g. climate change, water, migration) Supporting regional or subregional cooperation Supporting South-South and triangular cooperation Assisting Governments in leveraging partnerships Mobilizing external resources for development Government has insufficient experience with this category of partner Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme country Governments Turning to performance factors, the United Nations system compares favourably in the areas of aligning with national priorities, trust, impartiality and accountability to beneficiaries (see table 12). While results are encouraging, room for progress remains. Indeed, other survey results highlight room for improvement in terms of both alignment and accountability The areas where the United Nations is perceived to perform less well are achieving planned results on time and making decisions transparently. Regarding the timely achievement of results, there is no significant difference between how the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions are viewed. The United Nations system s perceived weakness regarding transparency is consistent with feedback from programme countries, reported elsewhere in the survey, nota bly regarding reporting to national authorities. The survey results in 2017 closely mirror the pattern of 2015 results. 66/157

67 Table 12 Countries preferred providers of external support, by performance factors Question: select UP TO TWO partners that best satisfy your Government's needs in respect of each of the performance factors United Nations system (agencies, funds and programmes) Bretton Woods institutions Other multilateral and regional institutions not part of the United Nations OECD/DAC partners Southern partners Thematic or alliance-based partners (e.g. the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria) Ranked first Ranked second Number of times selected Is impartial Is accountable to beneficiaries Is trusted by national partners Aligns assistance with national needs and priorities Responds quickly to new development needs and priorities Achieves planned results on time Makes decisions transparently Willingly collaborates with other external development partners at the country level Government has insufficient experience with this category of partner Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme country Governments. 1. Support for South-South cooperation 177. While not a substitute for North-South cooperation, South-South cooperation is having a positive development impact in developing countries. The 2030 and Addis Ababa Agendas require stepped up support for South-South and triangular cooperation as differentiated forms of international development collaboration. This is an area where the United Nations development system can maximize its leveraging role for partnerships and resource mobilization for the Sustainable Development Goals South-South cooperation displays an increasing trend (see A/72/297). A growing number of countries have either created agencies dedicated to South-South cooperation or have boosted South-South cooperation capacities within their cooperation institutions. The 2017 programme country Government survey shows 74 per cent of survey respondents providing development cooperation to other countries (table 13). Of these countries, 84 per cent exchange information and best practices on the use of science, technology and innovation to advance sustainable development. 67/157

68 Table 13 Provision of South-South cooperation Yes No Don t know Total Activity Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage We provide development cooperation to other countries We exchange information and best practices with South-South partners on science, technology and innovation to help achieve the Sustainable Development Goals Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme country Governments Most United Nations development system entities have incorporated South- South cooperation into their strategic plans, but progress is more limited in terms of reporting on South-South cooperation. For the past three reporting cycles, headquarters surveys have reported the extent to which South-South cooperation is incorporated into the planning instruments of system entities, into their strategic plans and into their annual reports (see tables 14 and 15). In 2017, South-South cooperation was integrated into the strategic plans of all but four United Nations entities (OHCHR, UN-Habitat, UNISDR and UNRWA). In addition, 72 per cent of responding United Nations entities report on South-South cooperation in their annual reports (among those that do not are ESCWA, UNCTAD, UNHCR and WHO). Table 14 Incorporation of South-South cooperation in the strategic plans of United Nations entities Has your entity integrated South-South cooperation into its strategic plan? Response Yes No Skipped 1 Total Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of United Nations entity headquarters. Table 15 Incorporation of South-South cooperation in the annual reports of United Nations entities Does your agency report on South-South cooperation in its annual report? Response Yes No /157

69 Does your agency report on South-South cooperation in its annual report? Response Skipped 1 Total Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of United Nations entity headquarters United Nations entities outlined the key challenges faced in mainstreaming and enhancing support for South-South cooperation. Several entities mentioned a lack of procedures or systems for management and evaluation and for reporting, through which lessons could be learned. One entity noted that a number of South- South activities, rather than being designed as an integral part of a planned programme were often single time, small-scale activities, the impact of which was difficult to assess. Some entities mentioned lack of resources to support South-South cooperation, while others indicated that this modality of cooperation called for unfamiliar operational procedures Resident coordinators were also asked about the challenges for the country team in providing the support requested for South-South and triangular cooperation (see table 16). Lack of resources and capacity remains the dominant challenge in the view of resident coordinators. The need for a corporate strategy and policy, which appeared less significant in 2015, emerges again as the second most important challenge in Table 16 Challenges for United Nations country teams in providing support for South-South cooperation, Type of challenge 2014 Number 2014 Percentage 2015 Number 2015 Percentage 2017 Number 2017 Percentage Lack of dedicated resources and capacity Nature of the request Business rules and procedures Need for corporate strategy and policy Other Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of resident coordinators The responses of Governments confirm similar challenges regarding suitable implementation and monitoring procedures and funding. A leading Southern partner mentioned the difficulty that some United Nations entities seem to have in understanding South-South cooperation as a modality of multilateral cooperation, as well as in providing guidelines and practices on how to proceed on the ground Notwithstanding, at the country level there is clear progress on United Nations support for South-South cooperation, with 84 per cent of Governments indicating that the United Nations has undertaken activities to support South-South and triangular cooperation and only 5 per cent noting no such support. Based on the resident coordinator survey, support for knowledge sharing and mutual learning 69/157

70 is the leading type of South-South cooperation assistance requested, while there has been increased demand for financial and capacity support for South-South cooperation management (table 17). Table 17 Types of support requested within South-South cooperation, (Percentage) Type of support Provision of access to knowledge and expertise of other developing countries Identification of cooperation partners Delivery of cross-border or interregional projects or programmes Support towards regional integration Financial support Capacity-building on management of South-South cooperation Support for negotiation capacity development Serving as an administrative agent to manage cooperation projects Others Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of resident coordinators There is scope for fostering collaborative approaches on South-South cooperation through the UNDAF. While 87 per cent of resident coordinator survey respondents noted that Governments had South-South cooperation activities, only 56 per cent of resident coordinators stated that UNDAFs substantively address South- South and triangular cooperation (see table 18). UNDG aimed to address this gap through its 2017 revision of the UNDAF guidelines, which call for UNDAFs to consider the use of South-South cooperation as a cooperation modality in partnership development. Table 18 Government activities on South-South cooperation and requests for United Nations support on South-South cooperation Does the Government have activities in the area of South-South cooperation? Has the Government requested the United Nations system to support its cooperation with other developing countries? Response Number Percentage Number Percentage Yes No Don t know Total Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme country Governments South-South cooperation support is typically not requested of the United Nations system as a whole but instead from individual country team members and is addressed in some country programme documents (see table 19). This is 70/157

71 consistent with findings on collective approaches to United Nations support, which show entities functioning fairly independently of one another. Several resid ent coordinators saw potential or referred to ongoing efforts to improve coordination in this area. Table 19 Collective approaches to United Nations support for South-South cooperation Existence of collective approaches to United Nations support for South-South cooperation Number Percentage The United Nations country team has an agreed strategy to support joint activities in this area 4 4 Some entities carry out South-South activities jointly South-South activities are carried out by entities independently Total Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of resident coordinators In July 2017, the Government of Honduras, the United Nations country team in Honduras and the United Nations Office for South-South Cooperation signed a firstof-its-kind memorandum of understanding, which brings together all three parties to promote and strengthen South-South and triangular cooperation. The memorandum of understanding defines the commitments of each party, based on their comparative advantages. Under the memorandum, the Government of Honduras will be both a recipient and a provider of South-South and triangular cooperation. Since then, the Government of Panama has entered into a similar agreement. Such institutionalized and system-wide support by the country team to South-South cooperation can serve as a model for other countries Overall, it is clear that there is an increasing trend towards more South-South cooperation and that Governments are increasingly requesting support from the United Nations in this area. However, much remains to be done to reorient the expertise and institutional arrangements to support Member States in such endeavours. H. Enhancing complementarity among humanitarian, development and sustaining-peace efforts 188. The quadrennial review calls for a comprehensive whole-of-system response, including greater cooperation and complementarity among development, disaster risk reduction, humanitarian action, and sustaining peace, stating it is fundamental to most efficiently and effectively addressing needs and attaining the Sustainable Development Goals A number of efforts are under way at the institutional level to promote coherence and coordination within and across development, humanitarian, human rights and peacebuilding action. UNDG established a results group, co-chaired by UNDP and the Peacebuilding Support Office, dedicated to policy and operational dialogue, bringing together key stakeholders from the developme nt and peacebuilding communities. The Group coordinates closely with other key counterparts, the UNDG results group on giving voice to common values and norms 71/157

72 (co-chaired by OHCHR and UNESCO) and the humanitarian Inter-Agency Standing Committee and its task team on the humanitarian-development nexus, to promote a coherent approach, including through a joint set of messages and guidance products. New UNDG arrangements are currently being developed, which may result in changes to the set-up of this and other UNDG results groups. In addition, the Secretary- has established a steering committee of principals to foster synergy between development and humanitarian activities A new partnership framework between the United Nations and the World Bank for crisis affected situations was established in early The framework expands collaboration to encompass situations at risk of violent conflict; ongoing conflict; high levels of forced displacement; and protracted and post-crisis situations. The United Nations-World Bank fragility and conflict partnership trust fund established in early 2017 a humanitarian-development-peace nexus initiative, which funds activities in a small number of pilot countries to identify collective outcomes and deliver integrated responses. In addition, in 2016 the United Nations, the World Bank and the European Union collaborated to refine and apply a joint approach for recovery and peacebuilding needs assessments At the country level, partnership agreements to enhance collaboration are also emerging. According to the UNDG results report, by 2016, 34 per cent of country teams had formalized collaboration with key partners, including the World Bank, to deliver coordinated crisis assistance. Just under a third had undertaken joint risk management assessments with such partners. In addition, two best practices have emerged in the United Nations strategic frameworks for Somalia and Lebanon. The provisional United Nations strategic framework 24 for Somalia aims to provide development responses to humanitarian challenges, such as food insecurity, while also addressing concerns on peace and security. The United Nations strategic framework for Lebanon 25 serves as the reference document for the United Nations system presence in the country, combining support for security, development and humanitarian response The need for greater cooperation is demonstrated by the variety of development, humanitarian and peace activities that are taking place at the country level, as shown in table 20. In this context, 57 per cent of Governments stated that they had national mechanisms to coordinate development and peacebuilding efforts supported by the country team; and of these national mechanisms, 84 per cent are institutionalized and 81 per cent are country led. 24 The Somalia provisional United Nations strategic framework is available from a320f0fd. 25 The Lebanon United Nations strategic framework is available from e /157

73 Table 20 Focus areas of United Nations activities Which areas of activity apply in your location? Response (percentage) Development 92 Disaster risk reduction 66 Humanitarian action 39 Sustaining peace 32 Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme country Governments. Table 21 Degree of collaboration among United Nations agencies Assess the level of collaboration among United Nations agencies engaged in more than one area: Response (percentage) Very close collaboration 18 Close collaboration 66 Not close collaboration 11 No collaboration at all 1 Don t know 2 Not applicable 2 Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme country Governments From the perspective of Governments, much more needs to be done to improve collaboration across sectors among United Nations agencies, especially in countries with large cross-sectoral programmes (see table 21). Overall, 18 per cent of Governments reported very close collaboration between United Nations agencies across sectors; 66 per cent reported close collaboration; 11 per cent deemed that collaboration between agencies across sectors was not close; and 1 per cent indicated that there was no collaboration at all. Notably, 4 out of the 10 largest United Nations programme countries, which together represent $4.2 billion in OAD (or 19 per cent of total country-level expenditures) were among those that did not state there was close or very close collaboration. Overall, programme countries seem to perceive that there is room for the United Nations system to work better across sectors Programme country Governments were asked to indicate whether the resident coordinator prepared a joint humanitarian and development needs assessment to inform strategic decisions. While 53 per cent of Governments had noted the need to address a situation with humanitarian consequences, only 41 per cent indicated the availability of a comprehensive joint assessment to inform strategic decisions. Such an assessment did not take place in 9 per cent of cases, while 50 per cent of Governments indicated don t know or not applicable Yet the views of resident coordinators on collaboration and coherence seem to contradict the perspective of Governments. A total of 87 per cent of resident coordinators noted that, over the past two years, United Nations development and humanitarian actors had engaged in joint needs assessments and 82 per cent of resident coordinators stated that joint planning had taken place (see figure XXXIV). 73/157

74 At 70 per cent, resident coordinators reported a slightly lower rate of collaboration on joint management and evaluation efforts concerning progress and collective outcomes. In addition, 82 per cent of resident coordinators stated that country team members provided them with sufficient and timely information to ensure strong coherence of development and humanitarian activities; out of the 27 programmes identified as large, just one resident coordinator disagreed with that statement. Figure XXXIV Engagement between United Nations development and United Nations humanitarian actors Question: If applicable, in the past two years, have United Nations development actors and United Nation humanitarian actors engaged in: Joint management and evaluation 70% 30% Joint planning Joint needs assessment 82% 87% 18% 13% Yes No Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of resident coordinators While resident coordinators have a positive view of collaboration across the humanitarian, development and peacebuilding nexus, they report better collaboration between development and humanitarian action than between development and peacebuilding, although there remains room for improvement in both cases (see table 22). Table 22 Extent of collaboration between development and humanitarian action, and between development and peacebuilding To what extent is development work in the following areas jointly undertaken with humanitarian (column 1) and peacebuilding (column 2) actors Humanitarian (percentage) Peacebuilding (percentage) Collective and/or complementary results To a large extent To a small or moderate extent Not at all 3 29 Joint analysis To a large extent To a small or moderate extent Not at all 2 26 Joint planning To a large extent Joint coordination mechanisms To a small or moderate extent Not at all 3 28 To a large extent To a small or moderate extent Not at all 3 29 Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of resident coordinators. 74/157

75 197. There have been repeated calls for the relevant United Nations entities to integrate disaster risk reduction into their activities, in addition to adopting a preventative approach to managing disaster risks and averting lapses into conflict, as expressed, inter alia, in s 67/226 and 71/243 and through the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the New Urban Agenda In response, at the global level, in 2016 the United Nations Plan of Action on Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience: Towards a Risk-informed and Integrated Approach to Sustainable Development was endorsed by CEB as a system-wide instrument to enhance the coherence and quality of support provided on disaster risk reduction and a monitoring system was developed to review and guide progress. In addition, CEB endorsed an analytical framework on risk and resilience, which seeks to provide a harmonized understanding on the concepts of risk, prevention and resilience, as a basis for coherent joint analysis and planning At the country level, integration of disaster risk reduction into planning frameworks is taking place. In response to the survey, 89 per cent of resident coordinators stated that the UNDAF substantively addressed disaster risk reduction, 89 per cent indicated that the UNDAF addressed the drivers of needs, risks and vulnerability and 48 per cent noted that peacebuilding/sustaining peace actions were included in the UNDAF. 26 The experience of Governments further validates the prioritization of disaster risk reduction. Over half (53 per cent) of Governments indicated that their country had needed to address a situation with humanitarian consequences in the past four years In the context of increasingly frequent, severe and complex natural and human - induced threats, there is a growing concern that these crises will reverse hard-won gains towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals unless the principles of risk, resilience and prevention are adequately prioritized. I. Securing gender equality and women s empowerment 201. The quadrennial review calls on the United Nations development system to improve efforts to promote women s empowerment and gender equality, including through the full implementation of the United Nations System-wide Action Plan on Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women, gender scorecards to assess and strengthen country-level progress in mainstreaming gender and continued efforts to achieve gender balance across the system, including the resident coordinator system The System-wide Action Plan has continued to make progress in gender mainstreaming (see figure XXXV). Since its roll-out in 2012, system-wide performance has improved, with 64 per cent of all 2016 ratings in the meets or exceeds categories. 26 A total of 39 per cent of the resident coordinators reported that peacebuilding/sustaining peace was not applicable to their UNDAF. 75/157

76 Figure XXXV Comparative analysis of overall ratings in gender mainstreaming for the United Nations system, Source: UN-Women 203. UN-Women has coordinated an extensive system-wide consultative process to develop the next generation of the System-wide Action Plan, to be rolled out in The framework introduces new indicators to monitor system-wide contributions to gender results, strengthens existing requirements and highlights key drivers of progress. The Joint Inspection Unit review of the first generation System-wide Action Plan, which is a continuing mandate from the 2012 quadrennial review, has been deferred to Promoting gender equality and the empowerment of women has multiplier effects towards sustainable development. In 2016, gender remained the number one area of concentration of United Nations joint programmes, with 62 per cent of UNDAFs featuring gender-specific results at the outcome level. The gender scorecard is also being updated in alignment with the System-wide Action Plan and the new UNDAF guidance. The updated framework was piloted in six country teams (Egypt, India, Iraq, Uganda, Ukraine and Viet Nam). Gender scorecards remain an instrumental tool in promoting improved performance by country teams As gender inequality and discrimination can result in women experiencing and being affected by crises differently from men, new system-wide approaches are being developed to ensure gender-responsive humanitarian action in a way that strengthens linkages between relief, development and resilience A United Nations system-wide gender parity strategy was launched in September 2017, aimed at achieving parity at senior levels by 2021 and across the board by The strategy, which complements the System-wide Action Plan, is intended to feed into entity-specific implementation plans and enable tracking and reporting on progress. In response, UNDG has decided to hold a session of the Resident Coordinator Assessment Centre exclusively dedicated to women candidates, to be convened in /157

77 V. Improving the functioning of the United Nations development system A. Presence and division of labour 207. The 2030 Agenda requires a new generation of United Nations country teams with a configuration in terms of composition, skill sets, functions and focus that is fit to deliver on the unique and increasingly diverse needs of countries The quadrennial review recognizes in particular that the presence of United Nations development system entities at the country level should be tailored to meet the specific challenges and needs of countries. Yet the presence of system entities is highly fragmented, with United Nations agencies operating in different locations, often in isolation from one another. Among other factors, this limits the ability of the system to provide integrated efficient and effective support to countries In the provision of tailored support, Governments and resident coordinators indicate there is room for further improvement, including in terms of staff capacities and skills (see table 23). Both programme countries and resident coordinators were asked whether the presence of the United Nations 27 was adequately tailored to meet countries needs. One sixth of Governments and resident coordinators (14 per cent and 15 per cent, respectively) strongly agreed that the United Nations presence was adequately tailored, and just 14 per cent of Governments expressed strong agreement as to whether United Nations staff had the right mix of capacities and skills to support the country s development. Table 23 Tailoring of United Nations country presence to the needs of Governments and mix of capacities and skills of United Nations staff (Percentage) The United Nations country presence is adequately tailored to meet the country s needs The United Nations staff have the right mix of capacities and skills to support the country s development Governments Resident coordinators Governments Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don t know 2 10 Total Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs surveys of programme country Governments and resident coordinators In terms of challenges to aligning the United Nations presence to meet the specific needs of the country, some resident coordinators mentioned limited 27 For the purposes of the survey, United Nations presence refers, inter alia, to the number of entities, the number and location of offices and the number and expertise of staff. 77/157

78 capacities of the Office of the Resident Coordinator, the weak authority that they hold over United Nations system activities and the lack of influence over which entities are represented in the country. Others highlighted challenges on the government side, such as inadequate data, weak planning and coordination mechanisms and limited administrative capacity In addition, resident coordinators pointed to skills gaps in country teams in various areas, such as economic analysis capabilities and capacity for Sustainable Development Goal implementation and integrated development. Having management structures that are based on results and are flexible and oriented to upstream policy advice was also reported as lacking. The call for the United Nations development system to pay more attention to economic analysis was also echoed by several programme country Governments As shown in table 24 below, Governments and resident coordinators have similar views in terms of the cost-effectiveness and flexibility of the system, although Governments appear to find the system to be slightly more cost-effective and flexible than resident coordinators do. Elaborating on the latter, some resident coordinators noted that the cost of maintaining separate entity representations, insufficient progress on business operations strategies and entities presence being determined more by headquarters considerations than country needs to be among the principal causes for lack of cost-effectiveness and flexibility. All actors agreed that presence should be based on a considered assessment of the country s current needs One Government in the Latin America and Caribbean region emphasized that it was crucial that the United Nations prioritizes consolidating technical and professional teams in the areas of competency of each of its programmes, funds and agencies. It also needs to simplify processes and optimize its administrative areas including re-sizing the administrative staff. Table 24 Perceptions of the United Nations development system s flexibility, cost-effectiveness and ability to collaborate (Percentage) Is flexible Is cost-effective Operates collaboratively The United Nations: Governments Resident coordinators Governments Resident coordinators Governments Resident coordinators Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don t know Total Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs surveys of programme country Governments and resident coordinators Resident coordinators reported that while the United Nations system generally operates collaboratively, there is room for improvement. Joint programming, thematic funds and joint mobilization strategies were highlighted in this regard, as well as the need to address the constraints of raising funds individually to sustain 78/157

79 their programmes and office presence. However, these improvements may not be sufficient to meet the demands of the 2030 Agenda Ninety-four resident coordinators commented on potential synergies that could improve the efficiency of human, financial and physical resources. There were numerous calls for increased joint programming, or making it the default mode, and for establishing thematic funds with two or more participating entities to encourage dialogue and complementarity, joint resource mobilization strategies and practices and increased joint work planning. Many resident coordinators provided proposals on how to improve presence on the ground. Many suggested reviewing the number of representative offices, minimizing the number and scope of individual back offices and coordinating decisions on office space to maximize co-location. They also suggested that staff of entities with minimal presence could be integrated into the management structures of larger organizations to ensure efficiency and resource maximization. Non-resident agencies, or those with a very small presence, could work with the resident coordinator before embarking on new activities to explore whether entities that are already present would be able to undertake the planned activities. In maximizing entity-specific technical expertise, it was noted that OHCHR had provided specialists to some resident coordinator offices, which was judged to be successful and cost-efficient Given the integrated nature of the 2030 Agenda, demands on the resident coordinator system to leverage and mobilize United Nations expertise in response to national priorities are expected to increase in the coming years. According to DOCO, almost all resident coordinator offices (97 per cent) supported non-resident agencies, while 66 per cent facilitated regional engagement in country programming and external representation Part of rationalizing presence includes co-location of United Nations entities (see box 3). As well as being a cost-saving measure, co-location can enhance synergies on the programming side. As currently defined by UNDG: (a) A United Nations House entails the co-location of two or more resident United Nations entities as well as the Office of the Resident Coordinator. The name United Nations House is conferred upon a recommendation of UNDG, and there can only be one in any given country; (b) Common premises refers specifically to the co-location of two or more resident United Nations entities. Common premises can be established at the national and subnational level, and single-entity premises and common premises are not mutually exclusive. Box 3 Challenges to the establishment of common premises In a 2014 UNDG task team report on the strategy for establishing United Nations common premises in the period , UNDG highlighted challenges to the establishment of common premises. The absence of a formal United Nations policy for capital funding of field office premises and the lack of sufficient technical capacity to manage real estate projects may pose barriers. Security concerns are another obstacle, where locating all United Nations agencies in common premises may not be advisable based on country-specific requirements of the minimum operating security standards. The turnover of members of country teams, a change of focus and lack of commitment may also result in swaying away from establishing common premises. 79/157

80 218. A UNDG task team is reviewing system-wide databases to establish global data on premises in order to increase the number of common premises. Data on United Nations presence, disaggregated by programme expenditure, is presented in table 25. Table 25 Rationalization of United Nations presence on the ground All countries Countries with large expenditures Countries with medium expenditures Countries with small expenditures Average number of resident United Nations country team members a Average number of single-entity premises a Average number of common premises Average number of United Nations entities in each common premises a Proportion of premises that are common premises (percentage) a Fraction of United Nations country teams with a United Nations House b 62/131 6/27 11/45 40/59 Sources: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs operations management teams survey, DOCO and UNDG task team on common premises. Note: The reported premises figures are based on a database containing data collected by the Department of Safety and Security. In the database, 12 per cent of the data were insufficiently detailed to determine an appropriate classification for the purpose of the review. a Information from DOCO. b Information from UNDG task team on common premises Table 25 also illustrates the degree of co-location of United Nations entities premises. On average, countries with large expenditures have the highest number of single-entity premises (34.3), likely owing to the size of each entity s portfolio and the correlated larger number of personnel, which also may likely lead to difficulties finding large premises that meet security policy requirements. Countries with small expenditures show the highest number of entities in each common premise, nearly one and a half more entities than the average. Entities that are present in countries with small expenditures are more likely, at 67 per cent, than entities in large or medium expenditure countries, 22 per cent and 24 per cent respectively, to be located in a United Nations House. Over time, a combination of (a) fewer single-entity office premises, (b) an increase in the number of common premises, and (c) an increase in the average number of entities being housed within each common premises, would together significantly improve consolidation of office presence This data reinforces the proposals in the July 2017 report of the Secretary- on the repositioning of the United Nations development system, which emphasized the need to establish objective criteria to rationalize physical presence on a country-by-country basis At present, the multi-country office modality is particularly used in the context of programme countries with small populations where the volume of resources is also small (although resources per capita may still be high), which are often small island 80/157

81 developing States. The multi-country offices in Fiji and Barbados each work across 10 small island developing States in their respective regions. Table 26 shows the expenditures on United Nations operational activities for development in each of the countries that the offices cover. The 10 countries within the Fiji office have combined expenditures of $70 million and the 10 countries covered by the Barbados office have a total of $15 million. Table 26 Expenditures at the Fiji and Barbados multi-country offices, 2016 (Hundreds of thousands of United States dollars) Country (Fiji multi-country office) Expenditures Country Expenditures (Barbados multi-country Core Non-core Total office) Core Non-core Total Fiji Barbados Kiribati Antigua and Barbuda Marshall Islands Anguilla Micronesia British Virgin Islands Nauru Dominica Palau Grenada Solomon Islands Montserrat Tonga Saint Lucia Tuvalu Saint Kitts and Nevis Vanuatu Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Total Total Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs There are 20 resident entities that are members of the Fiji multi-country office, meaning that the average expenditure among these entities in 2016 was $3.5 million. For the seven resident entities that are members of the Barbados multi-country office, the average expenditure was $2.2 million, higher than the average expenditure per entity in all small island developing States. In the case of the Fiji multi-country office, the average entity expenditure was also higher than the $2.7 million average for small programme countries The above analysis shows that multi-country offices can generate economies of scale by having one country team responsible for several programme countries, which in turn results in programme benefits for those countries. Consideration should be given to conducting reviews of the potential benefits and disadvantages of implementing this approach in other programme countries with small expenditures, not necessarily small island developing States, in order to ensure the best possible support is being provided On a related note, in the context of micro-states, as well as countries where resources are scarce, the benefits of a multi-country office model lie in its potential to provide an integrated vision, leadership, decision-making power and greater reach and access. Reach and access, in particular, refer not only to efficiencies, namely savings in terms of human and financial resources, but also access to regional and subregional institutions, networks, mechanisms and instruments, including at the 81/157

82 intergovernmental level. In that regard, there are important findings and conclusions of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs mission to the Fiji and Samoa multi-country offices that may warrant reconsideration (see A/71/63-E/2016/8) As an organizational model, it is important not to equate presence with physical presence. There are a number of differentiated presence and programming arrangement models, and not all United Nations entities necessarily have a comparative advantage in each country setting. In addition, multi-country offices present the opportunity to effectively implement programmes that are designed to cover several countries. 28 As previously stated, in 2016 the 10 countries within the Fiji multi-country office had a combined total of core and non-core expenditures of $70 million and the 10 countries covered by the Barbados multi-country office had a combined total of $15 million This highlights the need for a common understanding between all development partners that a multi-country office model does not imply that a reduction of physical representation equals a reduction in the engagement of the United Nations development system; that it actually has the ability to provide the best support possible through joint multi-country initiatives that capitalize on the advantages of reach and access and joint resources; and that as communicated by both Governments and the country teams, to do so requires a change in current donor practices, which often support single-country, singleentity projects. As for all programme countries, especially those with smaller programmes, multi-country offices must be able to benefit from the full capacities of the United Nations system at all levels On the division of labour among United Nations entities, resident coordinators and Governments responded in a similar manner. As shown in table 27, the extent to which both Governments and resident coordinators disagree on the existence of a clear division of labour among United Nations entities (27 per cent and 35 per cent respectively) is a strong indication of the challenges that exist in terms of overlap of labour within the United Nations development system. Table 27 Division of labour (versus overlaps) among United Nations entities (Percentage) Question: There is a clear division of labour among the activities of United Nations entities: Programme country Governments survey Resident coordinator survey Strongly agree 5 9 Agree Disagree Strongly disagree 3 3 Don t know 7 Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs surveys of programme country Governments and resident coordinators. 28 In 2015, with regard to the Fiji and Samoa multi-country offices, which combined cover 14 countries and territories, 8 out of 15 entities stated that over 75 per cent of their initiatives covered more than one country, and four entities said that about 50 per cent of their initiatives were similarly organized. Twelve agencies cover more than 11 countries, but only four agencies reported a staff presence in more than five countries. 82/157

83 228. Disaggregating the responses by programme expenditure gives rise to additional concerns (see figure XXXVI). Among the 27 countries categorized as having large expenditures, the share of Governments that disagreed with the statement concerning the division of labour was significantly higher than the average; least developed countries and low-income countries also disagreed more than the average. Figure XXXVI Opinions of Governments and resident coordinators on the division of labour among United Nations entities Question: There is a clear division of labour (that is, no duplication or overlaps) among United Nations entities at the country level Large - Resident coordinator Large - Programme country Government 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Medium - Resident coordinator Medium - Programme country Government Small - Resident coordinator Small - Programme country Government Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don't know Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme country Governments and resident coordinators. Box 4 Obstacles noted by Governments on the lack of a clear division of labour among United Nations entities Lack of coordination Budget allocation in silos Individual rather than collective workplans Overlapping mandates Contradictory instructions to the field from headquarters Competition for resources Some agencies presence is not needed 83/157

84 Inadequate consultations with the Government and lack of coordination within the Government Many development challenges are transversal in nature Note: The comments of resident coordinators broadly echoed those of Governments. B. The resident coordinator function 229. Through s 71/243 and 67/226, Member States have called for improvements in the resident coordinator system and the Secretary- has responded to the 2016 on the quadrennial review by providing a vision for change. The present report simply presents progress in implementation of the remaining mandates of the quadrennial review on the resident coordinator system, including those that remain relevant from One of the most frequently cited challenges facing the resident coordinator system, including in 71/243, is a lack of authority, capacity and prerogative on behalf of the resident coordinators to effectively lead the country team, in terms of both human and financial resources, and deliver on the UNDAF. This view is shared by resident coordinators and Governments alike Resident coordinators consistently report that they have limited capacity and prerogative to avoid duplication of efforts in the country team, as shown in table 28. Those resident coordinators who mentioned excellent cooperation in the country team generally associated it with personal relations and goodwill than to any institutional requirement. This points to a fundamental gap which needs to be addressed at the system-wide, institutional level, to include clearly defined roles, responsibility and mutual accountability. The perception of Governments of resident coordinators prerogatives is more positive, as shown in the same table; however, Governments experience would be limited to external manifestations of the resident coordinators prerogatives, and would thus not be comparable to the resident coordinators assessment. Table 28 Resident coordinators capacity and prerogative (Percentage) Resident coordinator has sufficient capacity Resident coordinator has sufficient prerogative Resident coordinators Resident coordinators Governments Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don t know Total Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs surveys of programme country Governments and resident coordinators. 84/157

85 232. Most governments would like to see the resident coordinator play a stronger role as it would reduce the workload and transaction costs on national partners. To do so, resident coordinators need to be able to make final decisions on strategic objectives in the UNDAF, which 64 per cent of Governments stated was very important. Furthermore, to improve resident coordinator accountability on United Nations activities in the country, more than half of Governments (56 per cent) indicated that it was very important for the United Nations to consolidate its country presence. Management and accountability system 233. In 2008, UNDG developed a tool aimed precisely at addressing the concerns of country team members on impartiality, while also bolstering the authority of resident coordinators, namely the management and accountability system. The management and accountability system includes the concept of a functional firewall to address impartiality and is based on four key elements, which are shown in table 29. Table 29 Extent of participation of United Nations agencies in the management and accountability system at the country level, 2017 The job descriptions of country team members, as heads of agencies, recognize the role of the resident coordinator An input from the resident coordinator is required for the performance appraisal of country team members as heads of agencies Agencies recognize an obligation to report to the resident coordinator on programme implementation Agencies recognize an obligation to report to the resident coordinator on resource mobilization activities Response Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Yes a No Total Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs headquarters survey. a Of these 12 agencies, 6 reported that this applies in all programme countries, while the remainder reported that it applies in most or some countries After close to a decade, implementation of the management and accountability system remains partial and with many gaps. All relevant entities (those that have country offices) have implemented the first element of the system: revising job descriptions. The extent of implementation among the other elements is more variable. Several entities with a substantial field presence mentioned that having an input from the resident coordinator to their country representative s performance appraisal was not universal, while others indicated that agreements existed on the obligation to report to resident coordinators on programme implementation (58 per cent) and on resource mobilization (46 per cent) It is worth highlighting that while the 2015 and the 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs surveys asked resident coordinators about implementation of the management and accountability system, no significant change can be detected during this period (see table 30). 85/157

86 Table 30 Implementation of the management and accountability system at the country level, 2015 and 2017 (Percentage) The job descriptions of United Nations country team members, as heads of agencies, recognize the role of the resident coordinator The resident coordinator has contributed to the performance appraisal of United Nations country team members in the past 12 months All agencies Most agencies Some agencies None Total Source: 2015 and 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of resident coordinators One set of measures that was put in place to bolster the firewall was for the resident coordinator or resident representative to delegate, as much as possible, the responsibility for UNDP operational activities (see 71/243, para. 57 (c)) and resource mobilization (see 67/226, para. 124 (h)) to the second most senior UNDP staff member in the country Table 31 shows that the share of resident coordinators who have delegated authority for resource mobilization is currently 81 per cent, up from 79 per cent in 2015 and 59 per cent in Moreover, 88 per cent of resident coordinators indicate that they have delegated responsibility specifically for operational activities. This demonstrates that, in nearly all countries where there is a suitably senior UNDP staff member, authority has now been delegated from the resident coordinator. Table 31 Delegation of authority of the resident coordinator, The resident coordinator has formally delegated authority for resource mobilization to the second-ranking UNDP official The resident coordinator has formally delegated authority for operational activities to the secondranking UNDP official Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Yes No Total number of responses Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of resident coordinators Feedback from United Nations entities, however, indicates that despite various measures to address challenges in the implementation of the functional firewall, the fact that all resident coordinators are also UNDP resident representatives, and thus are accountable for UNDP business, is seen as a critical 86/157

87 conflict of interest and a major obstacle to giving resident coordinators actual authority over the country teams, programming and other country-level decisions In further examining capacity and authority, 79 per cent of resident coordinators indicate that country teams regularly report on programme implementation, while only 28 per cent of resident coordinators receive regular information from country team members on resource mobilization (see table 32). This finding underscores Governments concern about lack of transparency on funding matters. Moreover, resident coordinators raised concerns on receiving information that is not fully accurate, or in an untimely fashion, including reporting after resources have been obtained. Table 32 United Nations country team reporting to resident coordinators The United Nations country team members report regularly to the resident coordinator on: Resource mobilization Programme implementation of UNDAF elements led by the agency Number Percentage Number Percentage Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Total Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of resident coordinators When asked what measures could improve United Nations relevance to the needs of the country, Governments repeatedly returned to the topic of coherence, calling for the United Nations to strengthen its own coordination and to grant more authority to the resident coordinator Finally, the financial support needed for the resident coordinator system to function effectively and deliver the expected results cannot be underestimated. The UNDG cost-sharing agreement for the resident coordinator system continues to have a persistent funding gap. In 2016, the agreement entered its third year running of funding difficulties. As in 2014 and 2015, this funding shortage was mitigated in 2016 by the deployment of the strategic reserves of the donor-funded United Nations Country Coordination Fund. C. Integrated support to maximize results 242. In the 2016 quadrennial review, Member States called for the strengthening of the use of the UNDAF as a strategic instrument, while also simplifying the UNDAF processes to reduce fragmentation, overlaps and transaction costs. They also requested that country teams use, where appropriate, the standard operating procedures and business operations strategies. As the evidence presented below suggests, there is a mixed picture in terms of the use of these instruments in countries. Joint planning 243. Introduced in 1997 to improve coherence, UNDAFs have become nearly universal, while the number of countries performing a common country analysis 87/157

88 required as a preliminary analysis for UNDAF development is growing. Among the 110 resident coordinators who responded to the survey, only 5 stated that the country did not have an UNDAF, and these 5 were either in high-income countries or facing major humanitarian challenges. Furthermore, 70 per cent of country teams reported that they had undertaken a common country analysis for the current UNDAF. This figure contrasts with 58 per cent in 2014 and 61 per cent in This is an important trend, as the common country analysis aims to assist the country team with identifying and targeting those furthest behind As part of the overall vision for a new generation of country teams, a strategic UNDAF that is better linked to country priorities and that is centred around shared, strategic objectives, is a central element. The surveys provided the opportunity for resident coordinators to comment on how to improve UNDAF and entity country programming processes. Among many responses was the recommendation that country team members should consult with each other at the earliest stage of developing their individual country programmes and plans, to identify potential synergies and joint programming opportunities and avoid duplication of efforts. Several resident coordinators called for eliminating country programme documents and using the UNDAF and annual joint workplans in their place, while others recommended that Governments approve joint workplans instead of individual agency country programme documents. The current time taken to finalize an UNDAF is 14 months on average, a lead time that could be reduced with changes to the processes Governments also expressed that United Nations system programming processes could be simplified and harmonized, including as a means to reduce the workload on Governments. Particularly strong support was indicated for single formats for programme workplans and progress reports, as well as for joint monitoring and evaluation and coordinated approaches to capacity-building. For example, 64 per cent of Governments consider that it is very important for the United Nations system to use a single format for annual workplans. A further 32 per cent noted that such a measure was moderately important, as may be seen in figure XXXVII. 88/157

89 Figure XXXVII Measures towards reducing the workload of national partners Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of programme country Governments UNDAF guidelines have been revised throughout the years, including in a major review in 2006, which proposed, inter alia, a further voluntary strengthening of coordination arrangements at the field level, known as Delivering as one (see figure XXXVIII). In 2014, standard operating procedures were introduced as mandatory for Delivering as one countries and voluntary for other countries. In early 2017, the common country analysis and UNDAF guidelines were revised to ensure that planning processes are well aligned with the 2030 Agenda and reflect the progress made through the standard operating procedures. 89/157

90 Figure XXXVIII Core elements of the standard operating procedures Source: UNDG The standard operating procedures are baseline requirements to enable country teams to work better together. As a set of good practices distilled from hands-on experience, the procedures are aimed at aligning the system-wide United Nations contribution in the country with national development priorities, while also making the United Nations development system more transparent, common-results 90/157

91 oriented and accountable. Recognizing their value to all programme countries, in the 2016 quadrennial review Member States encouraged the progressive implementation of the standard operating procedures and the business operating strategies One of the elements of the standard operating procedures, the common budgetary framework, was specifically requested in the 2012 quadrennial review. Figure XXXIX depicts the extent to which the standard operating procedures had been adopted in 2015 and Some standard operating procedures are well implemented, namely a signed UNDAF at the outcome level, joint decision-making, country communications groups, joint communications strategies, full implementation of the management and accountability system, results groups and the operations management team being chaired by a head of an agency. However, there has been limited progress where budgeting and harmonization is involved, with the following standard operating procedures needing much improvement: joint resource mobilization strategy, having operational costs included in the common budgetary framework, implementation of business operating strategies and having an annual common budgetary framework. Figure XXXIX Implementation of standard operating procedures Joint decision-making Country communications group % 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Results groups established Medium-term common budgetary framework Full implementation of management and accountability system Implementing Partially implementing Not implementing Joint communications strategy Signed UNDAF Operations management team chaired by head of agency Joint national/united Nations steering committee Joint annual workplans Annual report on joint results Annual common budgetary framework Business operations strategy Operations costs/budgets in medium-term common budgetary framework Joint resource mobilization strategy Source: UNDG information management system. 91/157

92 250. Resident coordinators were asked about the information and support received from headquarters, specifically in regard to the standard operating procedures and in particular the business operating strategy. Most resident coordinators judged support for standard operating procedures and budget operating strategies to have been either adequate or very adequate, with only around 10 per cent noting it as inadequate. More concerns were expressed about support in regard to business operating strategies than to the standard operating procedures in general. A few resident coordinators mentioned a lack of commitment on the part of some entities as a reason for limited progress. Delivering as one Figure XL Delivering as one status 251. The 2016 quadrennial review requests the United Nations development system to enhance its cooperation for development to maximize the Delivering as one approach in the countries that choose it, including through lessons learned and by integrating programmatic and operational functions in order to enhance coherence, effectiveness, efficiency and the impact of country-level efforts A total of 37 per cent of programme countries have now formally adopted the Delivering as one approach, compared with 26 per cent in 2014 (see figure XL). Of the survey respondents, 37 per cent are implementing Delivering as one, 12 per cent have requested a Delivering as one approach and a further 21 per cent have expressed interest in it. Only 8 per cent indicated that they were not interested. Considering that the Delivering as one approach has been available to all countries since the 2012 quadrennial review, it seems surprising that a significant share of countries (23 per cent) stated that they were not familiar with the elements of Delivering as one. Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of programme country Governments In Governments views, constraints to the implementation of Delivering as one include a lack of commitment from United Nations entities, a lack of alignment with national evaluation systems and misaligned accountability. Several indicated a perceived lack of commitment to Delivering as one on the part of some entities, while others referred to entities not adapting the procedures and to the vertical accountability of country team members to their regional heads. The fact that UNDAF reporting was not being aligned with national management and 92/157

93 evaluation systems was also mentioned. When asked how the United Nations could make itself more effective, several countries urged that Delivering as one be more fully implemented. One Government captured a common theme with a call to deepen the United Nations reforms, so as to create unified country teams, with the capacity to address cross-cutting themes coherently. The breakdown of these responses by country income group reveals that interest in Delivering as one is particularly strong in countries with lower income levels Another significant feature of the responses to this question is the very much larger proportion of low-income countries that are implementing the Delivering as one approach, 66 per cent compared with 37 per cent for all countries that answered the survey. Figure XLI shows how many countries are interested in Delivering as one and compares responses by country income level. Figure XLI Interest in becoming a Delivering as one country, by income group Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of programme country Governments Programme countries were asked how satisfied they were with the United Nations system s support for Delivering as one, both in terms of providing information about it and in supporting progress for its implementation (see table 33). The United Nations system is yet to fully meet the demands from programme countries on two levels: to facilitate the introduction of Delivering as one where countries have expressed interest, and to expand Delivering as one in countries that have already adopted it. Unsatisfied countries pointed to a lack of commitment by United Nations entities as a reason for insufficient progress. 93/157

94 Table 33 United Nations system support for Delivering as one (Percentage) Extent of satisfaction with the United Nations system s support for Delivering as one, with reference to: The information provided by the resident coordinator and other United Nations officials The progress to date in fully implementing Delivering as one Very satisfied 4 12 Satisfied Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied Don t know 53 a 6 a Most of these responses were from countries that reported they were not familiar with the elements of Delivering as one. Delegation of authority to country-level representatives 256. Progress on delegating authority to country-level representatives has been limited. Among the 11 entities with a presence in at least 50 countries, 6 have delegated authority to all country representatives to commit funding as part of a joint programme, 2 have done so on a country-by-country basis and the remaining 3 have done so up to a pre-defined amount. There has been limited progress on delegated authority for the use of joint workplans and joint reports. With the exception of UNFPA and UNAIDS, only 4 out of these 11 entities delegated authority to use joint workplans and 2 delegated authority to use joint reports While variation exists among entities, most resident coordinators perceive heads of entities in the country team to have enough delegated authority. When asked whether United Nations system field representatives in general enjoy sufficient delegated authority to respond effectively and efficiently to national needs and priorities, 72 per cent of resident coordinators agreed and 15 per cent strongly agreed. There is a great variation among entities, with funds and programmes tending to be decentralized, while specialized agencies tend to remain centralized at the headquarters or regional level. It is important to bring about more consistency, since activities are implemented more efficiently where authority is sufficiently delegated Since 2014, CEB, through UNDG and the High-level Committee on Management, has been addressing headquarters bottlenecks. In 2016, CEB reported that 30 out of 49 planned actions had been completed by the end of New actions towards addressing bottlenecks are taking place, which are expected to result in the adoption of the third revision of the headquarters plan of action. Box 5 Draft headquarters plan of action Based on the 2016 quadrennial comprehensive policy review, and designed as a continual set of headquarters reforms, the third revision of the headquarters measures consists of 36 actions, 18 of which are new. The measures are structured around the following areas (with the figure in parentheses indicating the number of measures): (a) One programme (4); (b) One leader (7); 94/157

95 (c) Operating as one (8); (d) Communicating as one (1); (e) Joint funding and financing (2); (f) Coherence across the Charter of the United Nations (2); (g) Additional measures for future implementation (11). D. Harmonization and simplification of business practices 259. The 2016 quadrennial review has reiterated the calls contained in the adopted in 2012 for simplification and harmonization of business practices UNDG and the High-level Committee on Management have aligned their workplans to jointly manage the harmonization agenda for United Nations business practices, as requested in the 2012 quadrennial review. Approximately half of 29 responding United Nations entities have submitted plans to their respective governing bodies for intra-agency rationalization of business operations. This is a positive development, with a 20 per cent jump from the last iteration of the headquarters survey in The High-level Committee on Management has identified a service provider model and a pricing model for a global service for reference checks and job classifications and other service provider models are presently under review. Key performance indicators for customer service and service delivery are expected to be ready in As for the UNDG business operating strategy, more country teams have begun implementing this medium-term planning tool for common operations. The UNDG information management system shows 26 frameworks that are fully compliant with business operating strategies in place, while an additional 34 countries are presently in various stages of developing a business operating strategy. Last year, UNDG noted 16 completed business operating strategy frameworks and 19 countries in the processing of developing a business operating strategy. Country teams with a signed business operating strategy currently account for 19 per cent of country-level expenditures The common service lines most frequently included in a business operating strategy are: ICT service solutions (included in 25 out of the 26 country teams that have a fully implemented business operating strategy) and common procurement initiatives (24/26). The four other service lines are less frequently used in business operating strategies: common administration and logistics services (19/26), common finance solutions and common human resources services, each with 18/26 of the business operating strategy frameworks, and common facility services, including common premises, with only 14/26 (see indicator 75 of the monitoring and reporting framework (see annex)). It should be noted that it is always a challenge for operations management teams to quantify cost efficiencies in non-data driven service lines at the beginning of implementation of business operating strategies. However, such efficiencies may become evident at the end of the business cycle Some resident coordinators indicated that the business operating strategies should be promoted to a much greater extent or even made mandatory, so as to achieve increased economies of scale in transport, travel, procurement, ICT, conference 95/157

96 management and human resources management. Resident coordinators further elaborated that it is challenging to economize in terms of human and financial resources given the lack of incentives to pursue such opportunities The 2017 survey of operations management teams sought to identify any bottlenecks preventing the implementation of high-quality and efficient operational support services. Results revealed a trend persisting over the last four iterations of the survey: many operations management teams still lack the resources and capacity to effectively conduct operational analyses. In terms of the main challenges in establishing a business operating strategy, 65 per cent of the responding operations management teams answered Conducting the cost-benefit analyses, while 42 per cent chose Conducting the baseline and needs analyses, and 35 per cent reported Lack of financial resources (see table 34). Table 34 Main challenges when establishing a business operating strategy Answer choices Percentage of responses Conducting cost-benefit analyses 65 Conducting baseline and needs analyses 42 Lack of financial resources 35 Developing a results framework 35 Lack of agency commitment 31 Lack of support and guidance from agency headquarters 31 Lack of operations management team capacity 31 Lack of operations management team member commitment 31 Developing a monitoring and evaluation framework 31 Other 27 Lack of delegated authority to operations management team members 15 Developing operations management team workplans 12 Lack of support and guidance from DOCO 4 Lack of United Nations country team support and guidance Lack of resident coordinator support and guidance Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of operations management teams Furthermore, the survey results confirm that 80 per cent of operations management teams still see different policies and procedures, and 75 per cent of United Nations country teams view different rules and regulations, as the largest barrier to harmonizing business practices at the country level. This, however, may be a perceived barrier. The High-level Committee on Management has already carried out a system-wide harmonization of policies and procedures in various areas of business operations, and when the operations management teams were asked for specific examples of how different rules, regulations, policies and procedures impeded joint business operations, only one of the teams could do so. In short, there seems to be a disconnect between the harmonization efforts done at the corporate level on the one hand, and what staff perceive they can practically implement at the field level on the other hand. UNDG and the High-level Committee on Management are presently working on improving communication to the field. 96/157

97 267. The Department of Economic and Social Affairs surveys of operations management teams between 2013 and 2017 actually show an increase in business operations managed through agency-owned departments, thus, in effect, reversing recent progress. The surveys also indicate that business operations managed by a lead agency are now shifting towards a more fragmented approach in all the areas shown in table 35, except for procurement. This trend could be explained by the possibility that some United Nations entities are consolidating their individual operations services ahead of consolidation of operations across the United Nations devel opment system. The continued perception at the field level that rules, regulations, policies and procedures are not harmonized may also be a contributing factor. Table 35 Management of business operations functions (Percentage) Question: How does the United Nations country team manage the following functional areas of business operations? Management through agency-owned departments Management through a lead agency Management through a common United Nations service centre Function Finance Human resources Procurement ICT Administration and logistics Facility services a Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of operations management teams. a This business operations area was added in With the growing number of business operations strategy frameworks, the United Nations development system has made some progress with the consolidation of support services and achieving efficiencies at the country level. However, this headway will not progress further if the communications gap between the harmonization efforts at the corporate level and practical implementation of joint operations in the field is not addressed Another constraint to collaboration is the differing levels of authority in the country team and operations management team: 66 per cent of the operatio ns management teams found that the levels of authorization varies moderately to greatly among heads of agencies (see figure XLII), and 66 per cent of the teams stated that these varying authorization levels were having a moderate to serious constraint on joint operations. 97/157

98 Figure XLII Varying delegation of authority among heads of agencies Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of operations management teams Even though long-term agreements are an important driver in achieving cost savings and efficiency gains in operational support services, most such agreements are not established jointly (see table 36). Of the operations management team survey respondents, 62 per cent noted that existing long-term agreements were set up to fulfil the requirements of one specific agency. As a result, 24 per cent of the respondents found that these contracts did not meet the needs of their own organization and they therefore could not participate in existing long-term agreements, and 38 per cent of the survey participants stated that United Nations entities cannot piggyback on existing agreements owing to differences in policies and procedures. CEB reported that, in reality, the High-level Committee on Management Procurement Network has removed any obstacles preventing entities from piggybacking off existing long-term agreements, regardless of whether these are agency-specific or jointly established. It may therefore be another example of how harmonization of policies is not efficiently communicated to the field. The rising number of business operating strategy frameworks has the potential to reverse the trend of agency-specific long-term agreements, as business operating strategy implementation creates an environment where these are jointly set up. Table 36 Factors preventing agencies from utilizing long-term agreements, (Percentage) Answer choices United Nations entities continue to establish agency-specific long-term agreements United Nations entities do not permit other entities to utilize their long-term agreements Long-term agreements are not in line with the policies or procedures of all agencies /157

99 Answer choices United Nations entities do not agree to the service provisions in existing long-term agreements External service providers refuse to include other entities into an existing long-term agreement Other a 31 Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of operations management teams. a This answer option was added in The perception that policies, procedures, rules and regulations are not harmonized is also taking its toll on the overall implementation of common services. Recent uptake has been incremental and there is a need for substantial progress if the United Nations development system wants to meet the provisions of s 67/226 and 71/243. UNDG should continue to develop a wide range of operational service solutions that can be adapted to the local context and be readily implemented. In the biennium, a start was made with standardized common services packages. However, this has been put on hold owing to priorities shifting from practical implementation of business operating strategies towards other initiatives such as mutual recognition The United Nations development system has taken an important step towards further consolidation of operational services in specific locations with the integrated service centres in Brasilia, Copenhagen, Hanoi and Praia. The Joint Inspection Unit recently undertook a study of the role of these centres in the redesign of administrative service delivery (JIU/REP/2016/11). The Unit found that despite ad hoc cooperation among service centres, there was virtually no systematic inter-agency effort to plan, develop or operate facilities for common benefit or for organiz ations to draw on the infrastructure and capacities developed by others. This issue has been incorporated into the next strategic plan of the High-level Committee on Management as a matter of priority, and inter-agency collaboration between global service centres has since increased, indicating that some centres are reaching a level of maturity and stability in internal service provision that may lead to opening their availability to other organizations of the United Nations system Meanwhile, the UNDG Business Innovations Group has been working for a strategy towards a common back office. This long-term vision incorporates one global back office where the existing shared service centres provide non-location dependent operational services (also called vertical integration ), and country-based common back offices support location-dependent functions and processes ( horizontal integration ). This would require that in addition to mutual recognition of each other s processes, there must be agreement on common operating principles Furthermore, the simplification and harmonization of business practices through the UNDG business operating strategy should continue, as there are many benefits to be gained: 73 per cent of the responding operations management teams reported enhanced management control of the common operations agenda, 62 per cent reported higher quality services and 58 per cent reported a more consistent approach to common operations (see table 37). 99/157

100 Table 37 Non-monetary benefits of the business operating strategy (Percentage) Answer choices Enhanced management control of common operations Higher quality services a 62 More consistent approach to common operations Enhanced ability to monitor and track impact of common operations Enhanced strategic planning Better prioritization of human and financial resource expenditures for common operations Better linkages between programme and operations Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of operations management offices. a This answer option was added in 2017 at the request of DOCO It is critical that, in response to the quadrennial review and repeated calls from Member States, the United Nations development system commits to a systemic approach to establish common support services at the country level. The 2017 headquarters survey shows that a mere 50 per cent of the United Nations entities have submitted a plan to their respective governing body for the consolidation of common support services at the country level, and/or have made concrete plans for intra-agency rationalization of business operations Furthermore, it seems that the United Nations entities find it challenging to report on the cost efficiencies of business operations. Only 43 per cent of the responding entities reported on the efficiencies achieved through collaborative procurement. The remaining 57 per cent reported that they were currently leveraging another entity s long-term agreements or have completely outsourced their procurement function to another United Nations organization Finally, many of the United Nations entities noted that the absence of an agreed methodology on how to quantify cost savings through collaborative procurement (and other operations areas) is preventing adequate reporting on the cost efficiencies of common business practices. E. Regional dimension 278. Member States have consistently emphasized the importance of the regional dimension in the work of the United Nations development system and, consequently, of coherent and coordinated approaches between different regional actors as a bridge to inform global policies, decisions and other work of the organization, and conversely to help translate these into regionally meaningful guidance The present report is limited to covering progress on the effectiveness of work at the regional level in terms of the support to and interface with work at the country level. In particular, it focuses on the regional commissions and the two Regional Coordination Mechanisms. The follow-up report of the Secretary- on repositioning the United Nations development system (A/72/684-E/2018/7) includes proposals for a revamped regional approach to better support countries in their efforts to realize the 2030 Agenda. 100/157

101 280. In comparing the United Nations system with other sources of external assistance for regional or subregional support (see table 11), Governments were more likely to select multilateral and regional institutions not part of the United Nations over the United Nations development system. This is the only area of support in which the United Nations system was not chosen as the preferred source, and the second survey year in a row where the United Nations is not in the top ranking in this category. Moreover, support needs to go beyond traditional reporting, as 57 per cent of Governments stated having received reports or studies that support them in their mission to implement the 2030 Agenda With regard to the regional commissions support to Governments on regional issues, there is scope for improvement. Roughly half the Governments report that the regional commissions contribute to their country s most pressing regional issues. Table 38 shows that 7 per cent of Governments considered this support to be very effective and 50 per cent to be effective. However, one third of Governments answered don t know, and a further 10 per cent reported not receiving any support. Responses from Governments appear more positive than those of resident coordinators (see tables 39 and 40), possibly owing to direct interactions between the regional commissions and national Governments, of which the resident coordinator and the United Nations country team may not be informed. Table 38 Effectiveness of the contributions of the regional commissions on highest priority regional/subregional issues Effectiveness of the regional commissions contribution on the highest priority regional or subregional issues of relevance to the country: Percentage Very effective 7 Effective 50 Ineffective 2 No support received 10 Don t know 32 Total 100 Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme cou ntry Governments. Table 39 Effectiveness of the contributions of the regional commissions on highest priority regional/subregional issues, by region (Percentage) Effectiveness of the regional commissions contribution on the highest priority regional or subregional issues of relevance to the country United Nations Development Group regional groupings Very effective Effective Ineffective Received no support Don t know Africa Eastern and Southern Africa Western and Central Arab States Asia and the Pacific /157

102 Effectiveness of the regional commissions contribution on the highest priority regional or subregional issues of relevance to the country United Nations Development Group regional groupings Very effective Effective Ineffective Received no support Don t know Europe and Central Asia Latin America and the Caribbean Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme country Governments The response from resident coordinators on the effectiveness of regional commissions on regional and subregional issues of relevance to the country is generally on the less positive side, with 37 per cent of resident coordinators disagreeing or strongly disagreeing and 17 per cent responding don t know (see table 40). Table 40 Contribution of the regional commissions to regional/subregional issues Regional commissions made an effective contribution on the regional or subregional issues of greatest relevance to the country Response of resident coordinators (percentage) Strongly agree 5 Agree 41 Disagree 25 Strongly disagree 12 Don t know 17 Total 100 Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of resident coordinators In addition, support from the regional commissions to the country-level work of the United Nations development system in four specific areas indicate a perception of limited benefits by the majority of the resident coordinators, as shown in figure XLIII. These areas are: (a) normative and policy support; (b) technical expertise; (c) platforms for policy discussion and exchange of experience; and (d) regional Sustainable Development Goal follow-up and review activities. 102/157

103 Figure XLIII Support from the regional commissions to the work of the United Nations country team Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of resident coordinators A clearer interface is needed between country teams and the regional commissions. Resident coordinators indicated having relatively little interaction with the regional commissions, which frequently interface directly with the Government. At present, 43 resident coordinators (39 per cent) report that a regional commission participates in country team activities, of which half is participation as a resident agency and the other half as a non-resident agency There are two regional mechanisms for coordination: the Regional Coordination Mechanisms and the Regional UNDGs. Box 6 Regional Coordination Mechanisms In its 1998/46, the Economic and Social Council mandated the regional commissions to hold regular inter-agency meetings in each region, to be chaired by the Deputy Secretary-, to improve United Nations system coordination. These meetings have been convened by the regional commissions since 1999, focusing on policy and programming issues of a regional nature and guided by regional priorities. In 2006, the High-level Panel on System-wide Coherence called for the United Nations regional setting to be reorganized around two interrelated sets of functions: The first set, focusing on the analytical and normative work and activities of a transboundary nature, for which the regional commissions would act as a catalyst using, inter alia, their convening power at both the intergovernmental and the secretariat levels, resulted in the Regional Coordination Mechanisms, one for each of the five United Nations regions The second set, focusing on coordinating the services of the United Nations country teams, for which UNDP, as manager of the resident coordinator system, is the catalyst, resulted in the Regional UNDGs, of which there are six, two for Africa and one for each of the other regions Regional UNDGs receive more favourable responses than the regional commissions in terms of support provided to resident coordinators on regional or subregional issues (see table 41). This may be because of the significantly more 103/157

104 operational nature of the Regional UNDGs. Nevertheless, the 2017 survey found that favourability had dropped for both the regional commissions and the Regional UNDGs since Table 41 Contribution of the Regional Coordination Mechanisms and the Regional United Nations Development Groups to regional/subregional issues (Percentage) Made effective contribution on the regional or subregional issues of greatest relevance to the country Regional Coordination Mechanism Regional United Nations Development Group Strongly agree Agree a Disagree a Strongly disagree Don t know Total Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of resident coordinators. a The 2015 survey answer choices were somewhat agree and somewhat disagree In the 2016 quadrennial review Member States called for the full implementation of a statement of collaboration between UNDG and the regional commissions. While entities indicate that the statement is being progressively implemented, a number of commitments in the statement of collaboration remain unfulfilled and the nature of the actions identified as progress do not allow for a quantifiable report on progress Indicator 69c follows progress on cooperation between the Regional UNDGs and the regional commissions through a proxy that assesses the number of joint regional common position papers advocating on key regional development issues. Feedback from the Regional UNDGs indicates that some regions have put more effort into system-wide collaboration than others. The Regional UNDG and regional commission of the Europe and Commonwealth of Independent States region reported three joint papers on issues related to sustainable development in both and in 2017; those of the Arab States reported one joint paper. VI. Enhancing the effectiveness of the United Nations development system A. Managing for results 289. Member States have called on United Nations development system entities to improve reporting on results achieved, including in terms of joint programming. The system-wide strategic document mandated by the quadrennial review is expected to serve this purpose in areas for collective support by the system for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. Solid results-based management and reporting, supported by evaluations with a management response, also serve to increase objectivity in the decision-making process. To the extent that lessons are internalized, policy 104/157

105 orientations are more likely to be based on development effectiveness. This cycle can be further reinforced by using country programming processes with clear accountability lines and feedback mechanisms that inform future programming. Harmonizing and streamlining country programming and reporting 290. A meaningful step towards a programming standard would include harmonizing and streamlining the UNDAF and individual entities country programming documents As seen in figure XXXVII, 53 per cent of Governments judged that it was very important for the United Nations system to simplify the UNDAF and agency country programming or planning processes as a way to reduce the workload on national partners, and a further 43 per cent stated that such a measure was moderately important. Similarly, 57 per cent of respondents stated it was very important for United Nations entities to rationalize agency-specific country programming and planning processes and 42 per cent said it was moderately important. In this context, it is important to ensure that the instruments in each process incorporate the same planned outcomes and lighten the burden on all partners The headquarters survey asked whether it was a requirement that the entity s country programme documents demonstrate complete results-chains down from the UNDAF. Encouragingly, 14 entities responded in the affirmative, including nearly all that use country programmes or engage in substantial country - level programming. Entities are, however, inconsistent in the matter of copying outcomes verbatim from the UNDAF to their country programme documents. Although deemed a best practice, and a requirement by some entities, there still seems to be a lack of guidance regarding the exercise. Yet, in the case of UNDP, not only a re UNDAF outcomes copied verbatim into country programme documents, but also the outcome indicators in the country programme documents are precisely the UNDAF indicators that UNDP is accountable for monitoring Progress is slow around reporting on the results of country teams (see figure XLIV). It was previously a requirement for all United Nations country teams to provide a report to the Government on results achieved at least once in five years. Since August 2014, the UNDG standard operating procedures have called for an annual report as a core element, and this became mandatory for all countries pursuant to 71/243 (para. 50 (f)). In the past year, 56 per cent of resident coordinators reported having provided a report to the Government. That information is corroborated by Governments: 60 per cent indicated that they had received a report from the country team in the past year. 105/157

106 Figure XLIV Reporting to Governments on the results of United Nations country teams Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 surveys of programme country Governments and resident coordinators Concerns also exist around the content and coverage of the reports provided by the country teams (see figure XLV). A total of 63 per cent of Governments stated that they received reports frequently enough, while 57 per cent noted that United Nations system-wide results were included. Less favourable responses were given on whether sufficient financial data was included, where only 45 per cent agreed. However, a higher percentage (74 per cent) of responses indicated that the report of the United Nations was structured around UNDAF outcomes, while 63 per cent found that reports were linked to national development results. While there is scope to improve in all of these aspects, special attention needs to be given to providing more financial information; to ensuring more complete coverage of the whole United Nations system; and to establishing firmer linkages to national development results. 106/157

107 Figure XLV Content, timeliness and coverage of reports of United Nations country teams Question: To what extent do you agree with the following statements: Reporting is linked to national development results Reporting is structured around the outcomes of the UNDAF Sufficient financial data is included The results of the whole United Nations system are included The information in the reports is up-to-date We receive reports on United Nations results regularly enough to meet our needs 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree Don't know Results-based management 295. In the quadrennial review, Member States underscored the importance of resultsbased management and requested the United Nations development system to develop common methodologies for planning and reporting on results, improving integrated results and resources frameworks and enhancing a results culture Governments were asked whether they had a national results-based management system, to which 62 per cent responded in the affirmative. The survey also asked about the extent to which the country team had analysed with the Government how results achieved by the United Nations in the country are defined, measured and reported on, with a view to ensuring compatibility between the national and United Nations results-based management systems. Among the 65 countries with a results-based management system, 75 per cent agreed (to a moderate or large extent) that the United Nations is working with them on promoting compatibility of results - based management systems (see figure XLVI). 107/157

108 Figure XLVI Promoting compatibility of results-based management systems Question: To what extent has the United Nations country team studied with your Government how results achieved by United Nations development assistance in your country are defined, measured and reported on, with a view to ensuring compatibility between them? Not at all 4% To a small extent 20% To a large extent 24% To a moderate extent 51% Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of programme country Governments. Source: Department of Economic and Social Affairs 2017 survey of programme country Governments Governments and resident coordinators were also both asked about receiving and requesting United Nations support in strengthening national results-based management systems (see figure XLVII). Of the Governments with a results-based management system, 47 per cent expressed having requested supported from the country team to strengthen the system and receiving it, while 16 per cent did not receive support after having requested it. A further 15 per cent did not request support. On the other side, 57 per cent of resident coordinators noted that the system had responded positively after the Government had expressed interest in receiving support from the country team in strengthening its results-based management system, while over a third (36 per cent) indicated that the Government had not expressed an interest. A further 7 per cent noted that the United Nations system had not been able to respond positively after the Government had expressed interest (see figure XLVII). 108/157

109 Figure XLVII Supporting national results-based management systems Question: Has your Government requested support from the United Nations country team in strengthening national results-based management systems? Yes, and support was received from the country team to strengthen national results-based management systems 47% Yes, however support has not yet been received from the country team to strengthen national results-based management systems 16% Don't know 22% No 15% Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of programme country Governments. Question: Has the Government expressed interest in receiving support from the United Nations country team in strengthening national results-based management systems? Yes, and the country team has been able to respond positively 57% Yes, but country team has not been No able to respond 36% positively 7% Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of Source: 2017 Department of Economic and Social Affairs survey of resident coordinators These results suggest that there are a number of countries where the Government has not received an adequate response to requests for support in strengthening national results-based management systems. Furthermore, several resident coordinators noted that responses to date have been provided by entities individually. Overall, there seems to be scope for country teams to provide more collective support to initiatives related to results-based management, in addition to or in place of responses by individual entities. 109/157